<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>A Love of Words &#187; back-formation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aloveofwords.com/category/back-formation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aloveofwords.com</link>
	<description>words from a linguistics-obsessed word-origin-seeking bookworm</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:28:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Back-formation</title>
		<link>http://www.aloveofwords.com/2009/08/31/back-formation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aloveofwords.com/2009/08/31/back-formation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:00:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maggie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[back-formation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[etymology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass nouns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shakespeare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[word formation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[word origins]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aloveofwords.com/?p=36</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is back-formation? Back-formation is when a shorter word (lexeme) is created from a longer word. Back-formation occurs when an affix (prefix, suffix) is taken away from a word to create a new one. The term back-formation refers to this process.
Remember how the word &#8220;pea&#8221; came from the mass noun &#8220;pease&#8220;? This is a perfect [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is <strong>back-formation</strong>? Back-formation is when a shorter word (<em>lexeme</em>) is created from a longer word. Back-formation occurs when an affix (prefix, suffix) is taken away from a word to create a new one. The term back-formation refers to this process.</p>
<p>Remember how <a href="http://www.aloveofwords.com/2009/08/21/mass-nouns-pease/">the word &#8220;<strong>pea</strong>&#8221; came from the mass noun &#8220;<strong>pease</strong>&#8220;</a>? This is a perfect example of back-formation. Even though the &#8220;<strong>s</strong>&#8221; at the end of pea<strong>s</strong>e did not actually mean plural, once this word got to English, the English speakers changed it. In English, having an <em><strong>-s</strong></em> at the end of a word makes us think it&#8217;s a plural; thus pea became the singular form. Sometimes when words are borrowed between languages, the original features of the word (like a suffix of <em><strong>-s</strong></em>) take on new meanings in the new language.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s usually hard to tell if a word is a back-formation just from looking at it. You might think that the word &#8220;<em><strong>donation</strong></em>&#8221; comes from the verb &#8220;<em><strong>donate</strong></em>&#8220;, but it&#8217;s actually the other way around. Donation was the original noun. Donate was back-formed from it.</p>
<p>Two more examples of back-formation are <strong>grovel</strong> (by <a href="http://www.aloveofwords.com/2009/08/27/shakespeares-contributions-to-english-part-1/">Shakespeare</a>) and <strong>sidle</strong>.  There is a pattern in English of how to form a <strong>gerund</strong>.  You add <em><strong>-ing</strong></em> to the base of a verb.  The adverbial ending <em><strong>-ling</strong></em> sounds very similar and is sometimes indistinguishable from <em><strong>-ing</strong></em> when it’s attached to a word.  Originally in English we only had the word <em><strong>groveling</strong></em>, and it was an <em><strong>adverb</strong></em>. Shakespeare probably thought that groveling was the gerund form of the verb grovel and decided to use grovel as a verb.  (Or, he knew that it was an adverb and figured it would make a nice verb anyway.)</p>
<p>The same thing goes for the creation of the word <strong>sidle</strong> from <strong>sideling</strong> (and/or?) <strong>sidelong</strong>.  Someone heard side-ling and broke it in the wrong place: sidel-ing.  Sidel&#8217;s spelling changed to <strong>sidle</strong>, and we were given a brand new verb via back-formation.</p>
<p>Some more examples of back-formation (found on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_back-formations" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>)&#8230;</p>
<ul>
<li>babysit from babysitter (a verb from a noun)</li>
<li>edit from editor (a verb from a noun)</li>
<li>syringe from syringes (a singular form from a plural)</li>
<li>euthanase/euthanize from euthanasia (a verb from a noun)</li>
<li>enthuse from enthusiasm (a verb from a noun)</li>
<li>resurrect from resurrection (a verb from a noun)</li>
<li>sleaze from sleazy (a noun from an adjective)</li>
</ul>
<p>Often back-formations start out colloquial and still sound strange for a while before they become commonly known words. <em><strong>Enthuse</strong></em> is still not universally accepted as a proper word.</p>
<p>In a sort of meta-recursiveness, the verb back-form (referring to the action of back-formation) is actually a back-formation itself. It comes from the noun back-formation. How&#8217;s that for confusing?</p>
<p>The word <strong>back-formation</strong> was coined in 1897 by James Murray, the founding editor of the Oxford English Dictionary. (This fact via <a href="http://grammar.about.com/od/ab/g/backformterm.htm" target="_blank">About.com</a>.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aloveofwords.com/2009/08/31/back-formation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
