yeah, innit.
On 11/8/06, Jon Corelis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Derivatives of the root dap- (which yields such English words as
> damage and damn) furnish a useful window on the nature of reciprocal
> exchange relationships, which were central to the ancient
> Indo-European peoples. In their societies, and in Proto-Indo-European
> society itself, a gift entailed the payment of recompense. The root
> dap- embodies the notion of apportionment in reciprocal exchange
> relationships of either sort. In Latin, the word damnum, from a
> suffixed form *dap-no-, meant "damage entailing liability." Its Old
> Norse cognate duan (also from *dap-no-), however, meant "poem." How
> the same Indo-European form can can come to mean "damage entailing
> liability" in one language and "poem" in another makes perfect sense
> in light of the relationship obtaining between the Indo-European poet
> and his patron (typically a king): the poet sang the patron's fame,
> and in return the patron bestowed largesse on the poet. The
> relationship was vital to both parties: the king's livelihood
> depended on the poet's singing his praises (in Ireland, for example, a
> "king without poets" was proverbial for "nothing"), and the poet lived
> off the largess bestowed by the king. The poem therefore was a
> vehicle of this reciprocal exchange relationship; it was a gift
> entailing a countergift just as surely as damages entail reparation.
>
> Calvert Watkins, The
> American Heritage Dictionary
> of
> Indo-European Roots
> --
> ===================================
>
> Jon Corelis www.geocities.com/jgcorelis/
>
> ===================================
>
--
http://www.badstep.net/
Suspicion breeds confidence
|