Re: CHAT: RPGs (was Re: Wargs)

On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, John Cowan wrote:

> Sally Caves wrote:
>
> > > > Hey, if "man wolf" was a good enough compound for our Anglo-Saxon predecessors,
> > > > it should be good enough for us!
>
> > Tom, John Cowan has simply taken me out of context, and appears to be
> > responding to a half-sentence of mine.  Actually, I don't understand
> > John's remark at all, or why my half-quoted sentence inspired it.  I
> > think it had something to do with my original question, and that was:
> > how do you say werewolf in your language?
>
> Indeed.  I was merely suggesting that "man wolf", whether it is the
> etymology of "werewolf" or not, is a fairly good compound for it
> in a head-last language like English.  "Wolfman" is also, of course,
> in use; so one can say that either "wolfish man" or "manlike wolf"
> is a reasonable compound for a conlang.
>
Perhaps it's an interesting datum that the Dutch weerwolf is
folk-etymologically analyzed as 'een wolf die weer man wordt' or
'een man die weer wolf wordt', i.e. with 'weer' having the meaning of
'again, back, again and back'. It implies a sort of to-and-froness
from wolf to man and back again.


Boudewijn Rempt  | http://denden.conlang.org/~bsarempt