nerdfilter: Latin prefix question
June 6, 2018 1:22 PM Subscribe
Dear Latin Knowers: what is the deeper semantic difference between the morphemes "ab" (away, from) and "se" (away, apart.)
For example why etymologically does a seduction involve convincing the other to be "led away," while an abduction involves overriding their will? For the purposes of this question I would *greatly* appreciate it if you would indicate whether you actually know Latin, or whether you are playfully speculating. Thank you!
For example why etymologically does a seduction involve convincing the other to be "led away," while an abduction involves overriding their will? For the purposes of this question I would *greatly* appreciate it if you would indicate whether you actually know Latin, or whether you are playfully speculating. Thank you!
I only have schoolboy Latin, but I think you're looking for a clear explanation that mostly doesn't exist. Prepositions are weird and sort of fungible in lots of languages. Could you give a clear explanation of the difference between saying a person is "in to something" vs "up to something" in terms of the deeper semantic differences between "in" and "up"?
In fact, the clear distinction we have between seduction and abduction in modern English is much fuzzier in the Latin roots. Depending on the context, "seduce, lead astray" might be a perfectly good translation for either seduco or abduco. Se and ab do have some distinctly separate meanings, and roosterboy gives a good summary of the high-level distinction. You would never use ab to mean "without" or se to mean "since". But they also have a big overlap where they're not clearly delineated, and trying to come up with rules to define why one word uses one and a different word uses another is likely to lead you more to just-so stories than to any deeper linguistic truth.
posted by firechicago at 2:04 PM on June 6, 2018 [6 favorites]
In fact, the clear distinction we have between seduction and abduction in modern English is much fuzzier in the Latin roots. Depending on the context, "seduce, lead astray" might be a perfectly good translation for either seduco or abduco. Se and ab do have some distinctly separate meanings, and roosterboy gives a good summary of the high-level distinction. You would never use ab to mean "without" or se to mean "since". But they also have a big overlap where they're not clearly delineated, and trying to come up with rules to define why one word uses one and a different word uses another is likely to lead you more to just-so stories than to any deeper linguistic truth.
posted by firechicago at 2:04 PM on June 6, 2018 [6 favorites]
So, I did AP Latin in high school but no studies past that at the college level.
However, I can tell you that ab is a very common Latin proposition with the literal meaning of "away" or "from", mostly referring to space but sometimes to time. It's also used with passive verbs to mean "by", as in "she was abducted by aliens". The etymology of "abduction" is pretty straightforwardly derived from there, meaning that you take someone away from a place.
According to Etymonline, the "se" in in "seduce" actually comes from the preposition "sē/sēd" (not to be confused with the reflexive pronoun "se" with a short e). Perseus, citing An Elementary Latin Dictionary gives the translation "by itself from, without, apart from", making the distinction that roosterboy talks about a bit more clear.
posted by tobascodagama at 2:06 PM on June 6, 2018 [1 favorite]
However, I can tell you that ab is a very common Latin proposition with the literal meaning of "away" or "from", mostly referring to space but sometimes to time. It's also used with passive verbs to mean "by", as in "she was abducted by aliens". The etymology of "abduction" is pretty straightforwardly derived from there, meaning that you take someone away from a place.
According to Etymonline, the "se" in in "seduce" actually comes from the preposition "sē/sēd" (not to be confused with the reflexive pronoun "se" with a short e). Perseus, citing An Elementary Latin Dictionary gives the translation "by itself from, without, apart from", making the distinction that roosterboy talks about a bit more clear.
posted by tobascodagama at 2:06 PM on June 6, 2018 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
Experience: MA and two years on a (abandoned) PhD in Classics, many years of historical linguistic reading for fun
posted by roosterboy at 1:59 PM on June 6, 2018 [11 favorites]