3,274,313
edits
βόλβιτον: Difference between revisions
From LSJ
1a
mNo edit summary |
(1a) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
{{etym | {{etym | ||
|etymtx=Grammatical information: n.<br />Meaning: <b class="b2">cow-dung</b>; (s. Rohlfs ByzZ 37, 54f.);<br />Other forms: <b class="b3">-ος</b> m. (Thphr.), <b class="b3">βόλβιθος</b> (PMag. Par.; after <b class="b3">σπύραθος</b>, <b class="b3">σπέλεθος</b> ?, s. Chantr. Form. 367); also <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b>, <b class="b3">-ος</b> (Cratin.); <b class="b3">βόλβιτα ἀφόδευμα βοός</b> H. (i.e. <b class="b3">βόλβις</b>), <b class="b3">βόλβυθον τὸ αὐτό</b> H.<br />Derivatives: <b class="b3">βολίτινος</b> (Ar.); <b class="b3">βολίταινα</b> cuttle fish, which smells badly (Arist.), also <b class="b3">βολβίτιον</b> (Gal.) and <b class="b3">βολβίς</b> (Epich.).<br />Origin: PG [a word of Pre-Greek origin]<br />Etymology: "The usual assumption that <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b> arose from <b class="b3">βόλβιτον</b> through progressive dissimilation, is hardly convincing" (Frisk). But that <b class="b3">βόλβιτον</b> is euphemistical through the influence of <b class="b3">βολβός</b> (Frisk) is not very convincing either. To derive <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b> from <b class="b3">βάλλω</b>, <b class="b3">βόλος</b>, and <b class="b3">βολεών</b> [[Düngerhaufen]] leaves the formation unexplained. It is much more natural to assume variation in a Pre-Greek word, which is confirmed by the fact that the suffix <b class="b3">-ιτον</b> is known from there (Fur. 163; further 180, 187; further the <b class="b3">θ</b> and the <b class="b3">υ</b> are typical variations. I wonder whether the variation <b class="b3">β</b>\/zero, to which Furnée devotes a chapter, derived from a labial [l]: <b class="b2">*balʷ-it-</b>, on which see [[αὖλαξ]] and Beekes, Pre-Greek. - The discussions in Frisk and DELG are examples of the wrong approach of Pre-Greek words: explaining away the characteristics of Pre-Greek. | |etymtx=Grammatical information: n.<br />Meaning: <b class="b2">cow-dung</b>; (s. Rohlfs ByzZ 37, 54f.);<br />Other forms: <b class="b3">-ος</b> m. (Thphr.), <b class="b3">βόλβιθος</b> (PMag. Par.; after <b class="b3">σπύραθος</b>, <b class="b3">σπέλεθος</b> ?, s. Chantr. Form. 367); also <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b>, <b class="b3">-ος</b> (Cratin.); <b class="b3">βόλβιτα ἀφόδευμα βοός</b> H. (i.e. <b class="b3">βόλβις</b>), <b class="b3">βόλβυθον τὸ αὐτό</b> H.<br />Derivatives: <b class="b3">βολίτινος</b> (Ar.); <b class="b3">βολίταινα</b> cuttle fish, which smells badly (Arist.), also <b class="b3">βολβίτιον</b> (Gal.) and <b class="b3">βολβίς</b> (Epich.).<br />Origin: PG [a word of Pre-Greek origin]<br />Etymology: "The usual assumption that <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b> arose from <b class="b3">βόλβιτον</b> through progressive dissimilation, is hardly convincing" (Frisk). But that <b class="b3">βόλβιτον</b> is euphemistical through the influence of <b class="b3">βολβός</b> (Frisk) is not very convincing either. To derive <b class="b3">βόλιτον</b> from <b class="b3">βάλλω</b>, <b class="b3">βόλος</b>, and <b class="b3">βολεών</b> [[Düngerhaufen]] leaves the formation unexplained. It is much more natural to assume variation in a Pre-Greek word, which is confirmed by the fact that the suffix <b class="b3">-ιτον</b> is known from there (Fur. 163; further 180, 187; further the <b class="b3">θ</b> and the <b class="b3">υ</b> are typical variations. I wonder whether the variation <b class="b3">β</b>\/zero, to which Furnée devotes a chapter, derived from a labial [l]: <b class="b2">*balʷ-it-</b>, on which see [[αὖλαξ]] and Beekes, Pre-Greek. - The discussions in Frisk and DELG are examples of the wrong approach of Pre-Greek words: explaining away the characteristics of Pre-Greek. | ||
}} | |||
{{FriskDe | |||
|ftr='''βόλβιτον''': {bólbiton}<br />'''Forms''': -ος m. (Thphr., Dsk.), [[βόλβιθος]] (''PMag''. ''Par''.; nach [[σπύραθος]], [[σπέλεθος]] usw., s. Chantraine Formation 367); daneben [[βόλιτον]], -ος (Kratin., Ar.)<br />'''Grammar''': n.,<br />'''Meaning''': [[Kuhmist]]; zur Bedeutung und Verbreitung Rohlfs ByzZ 37, 54f.;<br />'''Derivative''': davon [[βολίτινος]] (Ar.) und [[βολίταινα]] N. eines übelriechenden Fisches (Arist.).<br />'''Etymology''' : Vgl. zu [[βολβός]]. Die gewöhnliche Annahme, [[βόλιτον]] sei durch progressive Dissimilation aus [[βόλβιτον]] entstanden (Schwyzer 260, Solmsen BphW 1906, 722), ist kaum überzeugend. Eher ist [[βόλβιτον]] eine euphemistische oder scherzhafte Angleichung an [[βολβός]]; die Form der Komödie und der niedrigen Sprache wurde wohl als zu derb empfunden. Für [[βόλιτον]] ist Anknüpfung an [[βάλλω]], [[βόλος]] zu erwägen, vgl. bes. [[βολεών]] [[Düngerhaufen]]. Die Schwierigkeit, die in der nicht aufgeklärten Ableitung liegt, hängt offenbar mit der Volkstümlichkeit des Ausdrucks zusammen.<br />'''Page''' 1,249 | |||
}} | }} | ||
