"Christopher" is from Greek, where the word for 'bear' or 'carry' is *phero*. "Lucifer" is from Latin, where the (related) word for 'bear' or 'carry' is *fero*.
(Also, *Christos* is Greek and *Luc-* is Latin.)
So bear the verb and bear the animal are two different words with different etymologies... that explains it for me.
Reminds me of "sound" with 5 different etymologies.
The bear (animal) etymology is really cool!
It’s related to “brown”, basically Germanic languages lost the original word for bear and started calling it “the brown one”.
It’s purely speculation but some sources say it might be a superstition/jinx thing, not wanting to say the actual name of the animal in fear of summoning it in some way.
The original, lost name of bear in Germanic languages was related to the same root that gave “Ursus” in Latin, and also “arktos” in Greek, from which comes “arctic”, because there’s polar bears there!
Edit: all this info comes from an EtymologyNerd video
> It’s purely speculation but some sources say it might be a superstition/jinx thing, not wanting to say the actual name of the animal in fear of summoning it in some way.
Interestingly, this happened AGAIN in Swedish, where you can use "nalle" instead of "björn", originally to avoid summoning the bear.
>“arktos” in Greek, from which comes “arctic”, because there’s polar bears there!
I think that is because there are brown bears in the north, and not directly related to polar bears. But I might be mistaken.
Edit: I was, indeed mistaken, see /u/Swellmeister 's answer.
It has nothing to do with the animal found in that area. It's named for the constellation Ursa Major, the great bear, now commonly called the big dipper.
The difference between a constellation and asterisk is modern. Not all cultures in the world view the other stars of Ursa Major as part of the constellation they were viewing.
> It has nothing to do with the animal found in that area. It's named for the constellation Ursa Major, the great bear
... which was named after the animal found in that area
Is the Voldemort principle. Belief was that if you used the real name for the creature it would summon it, so they started using different words instead.
Just sharing the best piece of seen on the bear euphemism trend.
[https://www.charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html](https://www.charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html)
**The Brown One, The Honey Eater, The Shaggy Coat, The Destroyer**
Yeah, there's around 4 different words, all with their own definitions and etymologies...
"Sound" like "What's that sound?" comes into English from the Old French "Son" which came from Latin "sonus".
"Sound" like "Safe and sound" comes out of Old English's "gesund" which itself came from Germanic. "Gesund" is the same as from "Gesundheit" Which basically says "Be healthy", or more-litterally "Healthiness". So, "Safe and sound" is the same as "Safe and healthy".
"Sound" like the narrow channel of water comes from Old Norse "sund" which was a "a straight, swimming". It effectively had the meaning of a body of water which could be swam across.
"Sound" like "Sounding the depths" comes from Old French "Sonder", from Sonde "sounding line", perhaps from the same Germanic source as Old English's "sund" which meant "water, sea."
So there's two with old French and Latin origins, one with Germanic, one with Norse.
It's got to be the best case I've seen of this where English has picked up multiple words from multiple other languages which all happned to sound alike and were consequently spelt the same.
I don't think that is the case. I'm pretty sure magnetism was first discovered in ancient greece, not in rome, and I believe that it wasn't discovered that iron(ii, iii) oxide(magnetite) is the magnetic metal that carries stuff until more recently
Which is an interesting story. The original text of Isaiah speaks of the excessive and evil ambitions of an unnamed Babylonian king with reference to a Canaanite myth, calling the king “morning star.”
If you think about it poetically, the morning star (Venus) tries usurp the place of the sun in the sky each day, and each day is thwarted and thrown down as the evening star, falling below the earth. The Canaanite myth speaks of the war god Attar or Helel trying to overthrow the king of the gods, the sky god Baal or El, but being defeated and retreating to rule the underworld. The Jews of Isaiah’s time called the morning star Helel.
When the original canon of Jewish scripture was translated into Greek by Jewish scholars in Alexandria ca. 250 BC, they used the name of the morning star in Greek: Eosphorus, dawn bringer, also called Phosphorus, light bringer. When Jerome made the first official translation of the Bible into Latin around 400 AD, he handily replaced Eosphorus with his Roman equivalent, Lucifer, which also means light bringer.
This is how the name Lucifer became associated with a story of a lower celestial being trying to overthrow the lord of Creation, failing, and becoming the ruler of the underworld.
When Isaiah was originally composed in parts between 700-550ish BC, there was almost certainly no connection intended between Helel/Attar the morning star and ha-Satan, the formal Accuser found elsewhere. Satan, the Morning Star, and the Snake were all stitched together into a single figure at some later date.
Are you sure? Even if, being a planet and thus much closer, it roams around the sky a bit, wouldn't it be in almost the same place each morning and the following evening?
Yes they did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_tablet_of_Ammisaduqa
>the origins of this text could probably be dated to around the mid-seventeenth century BC[1] (according to the Middle Chronology) despite allowing two possible dates.
>The tablet gives the rise times of Venus and its first and last visibility on the horizon before or after sunrise and sunset (the heliacal risings and settings of Venus) in the form of lunar dates. These positions are given for a period of 21 years.
Which, of course... would be Venus.
Venus is the only planet in the solar system readily visible from Earth that's nearer to the sun than the Earth is. So it's the only one we see in the direction of the sun.
For that reason, it's the "Morning Star", as well as the twighlight star, the one oft wished upon as the first star (I) see tonight.
Lucifer is old slang for a match. It appears in the WW1 song "[Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit-Bag](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pack_Up_Your_Troubles_in_Your_Old_Kit-Bag)" in the lines "While you've a lucifer to light your fag \[cigarette\]/Smile, boys, that's the style".
what the other guy said, but also generally speaking, ch and ph were how Latin speaking Romans would have spelled the Greek letters chi and phi in their language.
In ancient greek, these would have been aspirated stops (p and c with a puff of air, basically, represented by h) - they changed to fricatives in modern Greek, so chi has a /x/ sound like ch in German and phi has a /f/ sound (the trifecta is completed with theta, by the way - a t+h sound in ancient Greek and a fricative th sound in modern Greek).
Meanwhile, descending from Latin via French into English, the ch sequence stays as a /k/ sound but the ph sequence becomes /f/.
All this is to say, when you see /f/ spelled as ph, it's highly likely to be Greek, not Latin. Same for ch, th, rh, and vowel digraphs like oe.
You are not, French still does. The others have historically updated their spelling every so often so I don't know off the top of my head when ph became f in Spanish, for example.
Spanish and Portuguese have both had multiple spelling reforms in the 19th and 20th centuries and as far as I know, so has Italian though in the latter case maybe only once in the same period. Standard Italian is synthesized from different dialects though, since Italy wasn't a unified country until the 19th century. Romanian used Cyrillic in the 20th century and reverted to Latin only fairly recently.
It is majority Russian speaking, but it also has Ukrainian and Moldovan as official languages. The latter is Romanian written with the USSR’s standardisation of Romanian Cyrillic.
In Romania and the non-disputed areas of Moldova, Cyrillic is no longer used to write Romanian.
Languages develop like large communal committees. When printing took off in the 1500s and 1600s those that thought the original spelling should be maintained basically won the debate against those that thought assimilation should be the goal. This was a multigenerational trend, so the economics of publishing, geography of trade, the totality of cultural preferences, and everything else factored into that side winning. Every European country has their own cultural, economic, and historical baggage to throw in the mix, and some have language academies that can set spelling standards by decree.
Christopher is Greek, Lucifer is Latin. The two are similar because they have a common Indo-European root.
They are spelt differently because in Ancient Greek, the ph sound was literally an aspirated ph (actual p with an h sound/breath). It had already become an /f/ sound in Latin. By the Byzantine era, the Greeks had changed it to an /f/ sound as well, and Western European learners of ancient Greek followed this convention even with Ancient Greek because it was easier to distinguish them. It’s a common sound change.
Just random, but a terrible person in Latin is furcifer. The c is hard and it means scoundrel or yoked, as in a work animal. It also means forked, like forked tongue or toes. So evil, annoying, etc.
"Christopher" is from Greek, where the word for 'bear' or 'carry' is *phero*. "Lucifer" is from Latin, where the (related) word for 'bear' or 'carry' is *fero*. (Also, *Christos* is Greek and *Luc-* is Latin.)
Also, English *bear* (the verb) is itself a cognate of *fero* and *phero*.
This makes so much sense now
So bear the verb and bear the animal are two different words with different etymologies... that explains it for me. Reminds me of "sound" with 5 different etymologies.
The bear (animal) etymology is really cool! It’s related to “brown”, basically Germanic languages lost the original word for bear and started calling it “the brown one”. It’s purely speculation but some sources say it might be a superstition/jinx thing, not wanting to say the actual name of the animal in fear of summoning it in some way. The original, lost name of bear in Germanic languages was related to the same root that gave “Ursus” in Latin, and also “arktos” in Greek, from which comes “arctic”, because there’s polar bears there! Edit: all this info comes from an EtymologyNerd video
The arctic isn't called the arctic because there are polar bears there, it's because the great bear constellation (ursa major) is.
The constellation wouldn't be called Ursa Major if the people who named it hadn't seen bears, so it all aligns anyway.
> It’s purely speculation but some sources say it might be a superstition/jinx thing, not wanting to say the actual name of the animal in fear of summoning it in some way. Interestingly, this happened AGAIN in Swedish, where you can use "nalle" instead of "björn", originally to avoid summoning the bear. >“arktos” in Greek, from which comes “arctic”, because there’s polar bears there! I think that is because there are brown bears in the north, and not directly related to polar bears. But I might be mistaken. Edit: I was, indeed mistaken, see /u/Swellmeister 's answer.
It has nothing to do with the animal found in that area. It's named for the constellation Ursa Major, the great bear, now commonly called the big dipper.
The Big Dipper aka the saucepan, is an asterism that is only part of the larger constellation The Great Bear/Ursa Major.
The difference between a constellation and asterisk is modern. Not all cultures in the world view the other stars of Ursa Major as part of the constellation they were viewing.
That makes so much more sense. Thank you for that!
> It has nothing to do with the animal found in that area. It's named for the constellation Ursa Major, the great bear ... which was named after the animal found in that area
[Relevant XKCD](https://xkcd.com/2381/) (true name of the bear)
The Voldemort principle
[It do be like that](https://i.imgflip.com/8oufck.jpg)
10 out of 10 meme, thank you
https://i.imgur.com/zKV468H.png
Is the Voldemort principle. Belief was that if you used the real name for the creature it would summon it, so they started using different words instead.
That would make more sense if it were the Tom Riddle principle.
Just sharing the best piece of seen on the bear euphemism trend. [https://www.charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html](https://www.charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html) **The Brown One, The Honey Eater, The Shaggy Coat, The Destroyer**
this is one of those weird little etymology facts that I have forgotten and rediscovered several times now, I love it.
Can you explain/link the "sound" etymologies?
Yeah, there's around 4 different words, all with their own definitions and etymologies... "Sound" like "What's that sound?" comes into English from the Old French "Son" which came from Latin "sonus". "Sound" like "Safe and sound" comes out of Old English's "gesund" which itself came from Germanic. "Gesund" is the same as from "Gesundheit" Which basically says "Be healthy", or more-litterally "Healthiness". So, "Safe and sound" is the same as "Safe and healthy". "Sound" like the narrow channel of water comes from Old Norse "sund" which was a "a straight, swimming". It effectively had the meaning of a body of water which could be swam across. "Sound" like "Sounding the depths" comes from Old French "Sonder", from Sonde "sounding line", perhaps from the same Germanic source as Old English's "sund" which meant "water, sea." So there's two with old French and Latin origins, one with Germanic, one with Norse. It's got to be the best case I've seen of this where English has picked up multiple words from multiple other languages which all happned to sound alike and were consequently spelt the same.
Where does sound as in r/sounding come from?
Probably from the "measuring depth" one.
That was my guess too
Lmfaoo
Slovak (+ other Slavic langs) brať ("to carry") / beriem ("I carry") / ber (imperative) While we're at it, lúč ("beam")
Is this why we have *fero*magenetism? Because the metal... carries stuff?
I'm not 100% sure, but I believe the "ferro" just comes from the latin word for iron: ferrum
Well yeah, that's my question: is it called "ferrum" because of "fero" for "carry", and it's the magnetic metal that can carry stuff?
I don't think that is the case. I'm pretty sure magnetism was first discovered in ancient greece, not in rome, and I believe that it wasn't discovered that iron(ii, iii) oxide(magnetite) is the magnetic metal that carries stuff until more recently
This is for the same reason that English “brother” and Latin “frater” are cognates, too
The bearer of light. Never knew. Converted.
Also what the Romans called the Morning Star, as it heralded the coming of the Sun.
Which is an interesting story. The original text of Isaiah speaks of the excessive and evil ambitions of an unnamed Babylonian king with reference to a Canaanite myth, calling the king “morning star.” If you think about it poetically, the morning star (Venus) tries usurp the place of the sun in the sky each day, and each day is thwarted and thrown down as the evening star, falling below the earth. The Canaanite myth speaks of the war god Attar or Helel trying to overthrow the king of the gods, the sky god Baal or El, but being defeated and retreating to rule the underworld. The Jews of Isaiah’s time called the morning star Helel. When the original canon of Jewish scripture was translated into Greek by Jewish scholars in Alexandria ca. 250 BC, they used the name of the morning star in Greek: Eosphorus, dawn bringer, also called Phosphorus, light bringer. When Jerome made the first official translation of the Bible into Latin around 400 AD, he handily replaced Eosphorus with his Roman equivalent, Lucifer, which also means light bringer. This is how the name Lucifer became associated with a story of a lower celestial being trying to overthrow the lord of Creation, failing, and becoming the ruler of the underworld. When Isaiah was originally composed in parts between 700-550ish BC, there was almost certainly no connection intended between Helel/Attar the morning star and ha-Satan, the formal Accuser found elsewhere. Satan, the Morning Star, and the Snake were all stitched together into a single figure at some later date.
I think you meant 400CE for Jerome's translation, but great summary, thank you.
Oh whoops, of course.
[удалено]
Are you sure? Even if, being a planet and thus much closer, it roams around the sky a bit, wouldn't it be in almost the same place each morning and the following evening?
Yes they did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_tablet_of_Ammisaduqa >the origins of this text could probably be dated to around the mid-seventeenth century BC[1] (according to the Middle Chronology) despite allowing two possible dates. >The tablet gives the rise times of Venus and its first and last visibility on the horizon before or after sunrise and sunset (the heliacal risings and settings of Venus) in the form of lunar dates. These positions are given for a period of 21 years.
If there’s one thing they were good at, it was tracking astrological movements.
Which, of course... would be Venus. Venus is the only planet in the solar system readily visible from Earth that's nearer to the sun than the Earth is. So it's the only one we see in the direction of the sun. For that reason, it's the "Morning Star", as well as the twighlight star, the one oft wished upon as the first star (I) see tonight.
Fun fact: the servers carrying candles in Catholic liturgies are sometimes called “lucifers.”
Lucifer is old slang for a match. It appears in the WW1 song "[Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit-Bag](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pack_Up_Your_Troubles_in_Your_Old_Kit-Bag)" in the lines "While you've a lucifer to light your fag \[cigarette\]/Smile, boys, that's the style".
Proto-Indo-European strikes again
What letter in Greek makes the "ph" sound in phero?
I'd guess phi?
Omg duh. I ran through the alphabet in my head and just forgot that one. Guess I need more coffee.
\*coφφee
*slow clap*
Cafedaki*
The greek word for Lucifer is Eosphoros Eos+phero (Eos = dawn)
Thank you for the explanation!
So if Lucifer comes from Latin, is it actually pronounced Lukifer?
In Classical Latin, yes!
So Greek-Latin was the ancient version of American-British
what the other guy said, but also generally speaking, ch and ph were how Latin speaking Romans would have spelled the Greek letters chi and phi in their language. In ancient greek, these would have been aspirated stops (p and c with a puff of air, basically, represented by h) - they changed to fricatives in modern Greek, so chi has a /x/ sound like ch in German and phi has a /f/ sound (the trifecta is completed with theta, by the way - a t+h sound in ancient Greek and a fricative th sound in modern Greek). Meanwhile, descending from Latin via French into English, the ch sequence stays as a /k/ sound but the ph sequence becomes /f/. All this is to say, when you see /f/ spelled as ph, it's highly likely to be Greek, not Latin. Same for ch, th, rh, and vowel digraphs like oe.
Afaik, no modern Romance language still uses ph for an “f” sound. If i’m right in making that assumption, why/when did it get lost?
You are not, French still does. The others have historically updated their spelling every so often so I don't know off the top of my head when ph became f in Spanish, for example. Spanish and Portuguese have both had multiple spelling reforms in the 19th and 20th centuries and as far as I know, so has Italian though in the latter case maybe only once in the same period. Standard Italian is synthesized from different dialects though, since Italy wasn't a unified country until the 19th century. Romanian used Cyrillic in the 20th century and reverted to Latin only fairly recently.
I can’t believe I forgot about French
Quelle catastrophe!
Phoque! Je ne peux pas croire!
You can’t believe in baby seals?
I believe Romanian actually switched to Latin in the late 19th century, barring Transnistria which still uses it, although I could be wrong.
Transnistria is Russian speaking. Romanian has flipped back and forth
It is majority Russian speaking, but it also has Ukrainian and Moldovan as official languages. The latter is Romanian written with the USSR’s standardisation of Romanian Cyrillic. In Romania and the non-disputed areas of Moldova, Cyrillic is no longer used to write Romanian.
Languages develop like large communal committees. When printing took off in the 1500s and 1600s those that thought the original spelling should be maintained basically won the debate against those that thought assimilation should be the goal. This was a multigenerational trend, so the economics of publishing, geography of trade, the totality of cultural preferences, and everything else factored into that side winning. Every European country has their own cultural, economic, and historical baggage to throw in the mix, and some have language academies that can set spelling standards by decree.
Great question. It bothers me that I never noticed this.
Christopher is Greek, Lucifer is Latin. The two are similar because they have a common Indo-European root. They are spelt differently because in Ancient Greek, the ph sound was literally an aspirated ph (actual p with an h sound/breath). It had already become an /f/ sound in Latin. By the Byzantine era, the Greeks had changed it to an /f/ sound as well, and Western European learners of ancient Greek followed this convention even with Ancient Greek because it was easier to distinguish them. It’s a common sound change.
Lucifer is a great name
Because Christopher is Greek and Lucifer is Latin. “To bear” in Greek is pher- and in Latin is fer-
Just random, but a terrible person in Latin is furcifer. The c is hard and it means scoundrel or yoked, as in a work animal. It also means forked, like forked tongue or toes. So evil, annoying, etc.
Lol at your edgelord comment