At 5/13/01 08:26 AM , Rialian wrote:
>===As a side note..I would consider "layman" and "mankind" nonsexist,
>actually. Not sure if the emtymology of the origin is absolutely correct,
>but it is my understanding that the "man" comes from "manu", which means
>"hand"....refering to the fact that us upright bipedal mammals have them.
No, the English word "man" comes from Germanic/Anglo-Saxon roots, not from
Latin. The Latin "manus" (not "*manu") means "hand", and is the root for
our word "manual" (as in "done by hand; not automatic"). But English "man"
comes from Old High German "man", which essentially meant "human being".
In Old High German, there were two major types of "men": "wo-men" and
"wer-men". "Wo-men" were female and "wer-men" male. The "wer" in "wer-man"
is cognate with the Latin "vir", which also means "man" (in our current
sense of "adult male human").
Somewhere along the way, English "man" got adapted to mean males only, and
wer-man dropped from use. Personally, I like the old way: the root word
means humans in general, and then you add a modifier to make it
specifically one gender or the other.
--Kai MacTane
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Death and money make their point once more,
In the shape of philosophical assassins..."
--Shriekback,
"Gunning for the
Buddha"
_______________________________________________
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
