0

Premise: English has no cognate to the Germanic verb sein "to be" which is known by comparison with other Germanic languages.

Question: Does the relative chronology of the word "sin"](https://www.etymonline.com/word/sin) permit dating it to pre-written times (before ~800AD)? Then could it have lead to the verb being avoided (the noun sin being somewhat taboo)?

English shares most of the paradigm of "to be" with Old Saxon and Frisian, and has innovated are perhaps in tandem with Norse.

In particular, moods like the hypothetical subjunctive may be shunned, especially in the etymologist's domain where the tend not to speculate. All the more, I am surprised to find etymonline concur however tentatively:

sin

[...] probably ultimately "it is true,"

[...] from PIE *snt-ya-, a collective form from *es-ont- "becoming," present participle of root *es- "to be."

Is this use of "sin" as a copula new?


Also, as a side question, when did the dental leave the English word (cp. Ger. Sünde)?

9
  • I'm puttinn a lot of effort into this. If anything is off, please advise revision.
    – vectory
    Aug 11 '21 at 21:19
  • 1
    What exactly is your question? "Should it sin new?" 'should'? 'sin'? "Where did the dental leave of anyway (cp. Ger. Sünde)?" Which dental? Do we need to study the etymonline entry first? Please edit extensively, thinking considerably about what would make it easier for others to understand.
    – Mitch
    Aug 11 '21 at 21:57
  • 1
    Please edit your question into standard English, and make sure to include an actual question.
    – tchrist
    Aug 11 '21 at 22:20
  • 2
    I find the whole question and its arguments impossible to understand. Indeed, I'm not sure that there is a question at all. I am voting to close this as lacking coherence.
    – Greybeard
    Aug 11 '21 at 22:29
  • @tchrist feel free to delete any sentence you find incomprehensible. what remains should still be a legible question if you try to follow through, but you don't because you have to assume stupid writing makes for stupid questions, right? Jokes on you, interpretation lies in the eye of the beholder, so if the question is stupid, so are
    – vectory
    Aug 12 '21 at 5:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.