Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ptsfa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amd!dual!ptsfa!rob
From: rob@ptsfa.UUCP (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: net.nlang,net.women
Subject: Re: Gender-specific neuter pronouns
Message-ID: <465@ptsfa.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 5-Feb-85 12:17:06 EST
Article-I.D.: ptsfa.465
Posted: Tue Feb  5 12:17:06 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Feb-85 04:48:56 EST
References: <1285@bbncca.ARPA> <384@hou5h.UUCP>
Organization: Pacific Bell, San Francisco
Lines: 25
Xref: utcs net.nlang:2485 net.women:4363

> >>                             .... The nominative form of the word for
> >> 'man' gave rise to the Modern French word for 'one' (generic person):
> >> 
> >> case	Latin 	->	Old French ->	Mod French	Mod French meaning
> >> 
> >> nom.	homo	->	om	->	on		one (the generic person)
> >>--
> >
> >Note, however, that "homo" is the Latin noun for "human", and not for
> >"male human".  English speakers tend to forget this vocabulary distinction,
> >since our word "man" means both.  The Latin for "man" meaning "male human" is
> >"vir".
> >			    Morris M. Keesan
> Hmmm, did you know that "many" is the Old English for the plural of "man"?
Who's pulling your leg? :-)

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, "many" (which was"maenig" in
Old English) comes from the Proto-IndoEuropean root *menegh-, which means
"copious", while "man" comes from the Proto-IndoEuropean root *man-/*mon-,
meaning "man".
-- 


Rob Bernardo, Pacific Bell, San Francisco, California
{ihnp4,ucbvax,cbosgd,decwrl,amd70,fortune,zehntel}!dual!ptsfa!rob