Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The OED's definition of the word 'until' lists the following as its etymology:

Middle English: from Old Norse und 'as far as' + till (the sense thus duplicated)

Etymonline similarly states:

c.1200, from O.N. und "as far as, up to" (related to O.E. end; see end) + till "until, up to".

Looking at the two entries, it seems that until is made up of two roots which mean the same thing, rendering the word something of a tautology ('up to up to'). Or does it? Etymonline also states that it is related to the word end which would effectively make the etymology of until mean, 'up to the end'. This makes some sort of sense.

The OED (online), however, does not list until as being related to end. Moreover, Etymonline does not mention und in its entry for end either, which makes things a little confusing.

So, is until something of a tautology? If so, is it unique in this aspect?

share|improve this question
1  
It may be that und is Old Norse for "as far as" but till still exists in Swedish for to; so until could be analysed as "all the way to". But I would have thought the OED could have done that. –  Andrew Leach Aug 4 '12 at 21:26
2  
I don't think tautology is the right word here, more like redundant. –  Peter Olson Aug 4 '12 at 21:57
1  
Interesting question. To answer it, I think we’d need to see how und, till, and und+till = until were all used. If all are distinct, then it’s probably not a tautology; but there may be substantial overlap. (Unfortunately, Old Norse isn’t a language I have any experience with.) –  Daniel Harbour Aug 4 '12 at 21:58
    
2 down votes. 0 explanations. –  coleopterist Aug 5 '12 at 6:13
    
@PeterOlson A tautology is, by definition, redundant. So is pleonasm. –  coleopterist Aug 5 '12 at 6:13

1 Answer 1

It may have been perceived as redundant in by some in the 13th century (but I've seen no evidence of that). It's certainly not redundant now, and to impute redundancy to it is an instance of the etymological fallacy.

Since it's originally a northern term, I'd guess that it represented a conflation of the terms used by two interpenetrating speech communities, the ON and OE.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.