Print

Print


Maybe ἑνίζω, since it's got that -ίζω ending that a lot of other words like
too (:

Eugene

2009/11/13 R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>

> Philip Newton wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> 2009/11/11 Tony Harris <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>> One interesting one, tying in with the USA thread
>>> title, is the Esperanto word for the USA: Usono, which
>>> I understand is from United States Of North-America
>>> plus the -o of Esperanto nouns.  Although it could also
>>> be from the Esperanto names of the letters: U So No.
>>>
>>
>> I've always assumed it was from the names of the letters.
>>
>
> The origin of the Novial word for the USA is more
> transparent: _Usa_.
>
> From which is derived: usane = an inhabitant of the USA
> (with masc. _usano_ & fem. _usana_), and the adjective
> _usani_ = of or pertaining to the USA.
>
> I note other auxlang of that period did not use just a single word, e.g.
> Volapük: Tats-Pebalöl Meropa (TPM)
> Ido: Unionita Stati di Amerika
> Interlingue: Unit States de America (abreviat USA)
>
> As TAKE is a would-be auxlang in WHAT (Western Hellenic Alternative
> Time-line) - tho _not_ in our time-line - I thought I'd give a TAKE version
> (assuming, of course, that something more or less corresponding to the USA
> existed in WHAT ;)
>
> But I have slight problems. I'm hesitating whether the TAKE verb "to unite"
> should be derived from the ancient Greek ἑνίζω (hen'izo:) ἑνόω (hen'o.o:).
> Also the TAKE versions I coming up with are ambiguous; the may mean 'the
> United State of America' rather than 'United States of America' - two rather
> different ideas, I think.
>
> Of course, TAKE /takE/ is actually an acronym   :)
>
> --
> Ray
> ==================================
> http://www.carolandray.plus.com
> ==================================
> Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
> There's none too old to learn.
> [WELSH PROVERB]
>