Etymology And Magic Yaskas Nirukta Flatos Cratylus And Riddle Of Semanticetymologies

Author(s): Johannes Bronkhorst
Publisher: Johannes Bronkhorst

Page 11

166
Jolicomes Bronkhorst
Etymology and Magic
167
appropriateness. This analysis does not however have to fit the word too closely. It doesn't matter if a letter is added or subtracted (393d). **Varieties in the syllables is admissible, so that names which are the same appear different to the uninitiated, just as the physicians' drugs, when prepared with various colours and perfumes, seem different to us, though they are the same, but to the physician, who considers only their medicinal value, they seem the same, and he is not confused by the additions. So perhaps the man who knows about names considers their value and is not confused if some letter is added, transposed, or subtracted, or even if the force of the name is expressed in entirely different letters. So, for instance, in the names we were just discussing. Astyanax and Hector, none of the letters is the same, except i but nevertheless they have the same meaning." (394a-b). "We often put in ar take out letters....and we change the accent" (399a). Originally the true nature of words was more easily recognizable, but people attach "more importance to euphony than to truth" (404d), they beautify names (408b). they add sounds merely for the sake of euphony (412e). to make the words prettier (417e), they "care nothing for the truth, but only for the shape of their mouths" (414d). "The original words have before now been completely buried by those who wished to dress them up for they have added and subtracted letters for the sake of euphony and have distorted the words in every way for omamentation or merely in the lapse of time" (414c); "they keep adding to the original words until finally no human being can understand what in the world the word means" (414d). In brief, words get twisted in all sorts of ways" (421d). The ancient language, on the other hand, shows clearly the real sense of words (418b). It is also clear that when anyone knows the nature of the name - and its nature is that of the thing
- he will know the thing also, since it is like the name" (435d-e). It is striking to see that the factors specified in the Nirukta as to be taken into consideration in etymologising (transposition, loss, addition and modification of sounds) are found here, too.
The Cratylus contains a great number of practical examples of etymologies'. For our present purposes it is not necessary to discuss these in detail. It is more interesting to see how Plato, through Socrates, faces the problem of the multitude of languages. Greek is for him not the only language, nor indeed the only correct, or even the best language. The creators of other languages are clearly assumed to have taken equally great care to make names in those other languages 'fit' their respective objects. The ideal names are expressed differently in different languages: "Then, my dear friend, must not the lawgiver also know how to embody in the sounds and syllables that name which is fitted by nature for each object? Must he not make and give all his names with his eye fixed upon the absolute or ideal name, if he is to be an authoritative giver of names? And if different lawgivers do not embody it in the same syllables, we must not forget this ideal name on that account for different smiths do not embody the form in the same iron, though making the same instrument for the same purpose, but so long as they reproduce the same ideal, though it be in different iron, still the instrument is as it should be, whether it be made here or in foreign lands... On this basis, then, you will judge the lawgiver, whether he be here or in a foreign land, so long as he gives to each thing the proper form of the name, in whatsoever syllables, to be no worse lawgiver, whether here or anywhere else" (389d-390a). The result of this is that the etymological method can be applied to other languages too: "f foreign names are examined, the meaning of each of them is equally evident" (400b-c). However, if we should try to demonstrate the fitness of [foreign] words in accordance with the Greek language, and not in accordance with the language from which they are derived, you know we should get into trouble" (409e). Socrates admits however that where he finds it hard to understand a word and its etymology he applies the contrivance of claiming it to be of foreign origin (416a).
The discussion of this device induces Socrates to take his investigation even further than heretofore, and it is this continued investigation which provides him with one of the arguments because of which he
4! They have been collected and systematized in Gaiser, 1974: 54-57.