Timeline for Why is it "behead" and not "dehead"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2018 at 13:26 | answer | added | Sylomun Weah | timeline score: 5 | |
| Apr 4, 2015 at 19:19 | history | edited | tchrist♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 7, 2015 at 14:14 | vote | accept | Zairja | ||
| Jan 7, 2015 at 1:19 | comment | added | tchrist♦ | @JanusBahsJacquet Yeah, that answer has a very weird notion of be-'s origins and connections. The first paragraph of the OED’s rather lengthy be- entry is much more interesting — and completely different from anything in that answer. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:52 | comment | added | Drew | @JanusBahsJacquet: You put what I said backward. I wrote about answering Why be-? with Because de-, not answering Why not be-? with Because de-. And yes, I meant what you said in your last sentence - I was trying to save comment space by not repeating dehead & behead. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:45 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @Drew There is also the minor issue that the accepted (and very upvoted!) answer in the other is wrong and gives a completely anachronistic and incorrect etymology for the be- prefix. Also, that question does not deal with the last bit of this one: what other words use be- in this rare, privative sense. (Incidentally, “Why not be-? Because we already had de-” is not what tchrist’s answer says at all. It says, “Why not dehead? Because we already had behead.”) | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:40 | comment | added | Drew | @tchrist: OK, that adds to what is on the other page, by specifically addressing the de- alternative. It doesn't deal with Why be-? in a satisfying way, however, and that is answered over there. Answering Why be-? with Because we already had de- is leaves something to be desired (it is true, but a bit of a copout). It leaves out Then why not foo- or wup- instead of de-? Anyway, I see your point as to why to keep this as another question. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:32 | comment | added | tchrist♦ | @Drew Are you sure? I think the answer to this question is the first sentence of my answer, which I don’t see how to infer from that question. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:29 | comment | added | Drew | @ermanen: Not only related. That question and its answers seems to cover this one. Shouldn't this be closed as a dup? | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:18 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackEnglish/status/552574945168195586 | ||
| Jan 6, 2015 at 21:12 | answer | added | rogermue | timeline score: -6 | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 19:18 | answer | added | tchrist♦ | timeline score: 77 | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 18:54 | comment | added | ermanen | Related: How does the “be-” prefix change the words to which it is applied? How did it come about? | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 18:52 | answer | added | Dave Magner | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 18:37 | history | asked | Zairja | CC BY-SA 3.0 |