• Kethal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    You have no idea what your talking about. It is not and never was a compound word of wife and man. The word wif meant the same thing as the modern day word woman. The word wifman was a compound word that would be translated into modern English as woman-person, with the exact same meaning as woman is used to today. It had nothing at all to do with being married. I’ve read the comment chain, where you say, repeatedly, that the word woman originates with a meaning related to marriage. It doesn’t, at all. You do not understand what you are reading.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      No, it was wif - man. I offered a source, an indignant nuh uh is not a source so how about you go and get one.

      adult female human," late Old English wimman, wiman (plural wimmen), literally “woman-man,” alteration of wifman (plural wifmen) “woman, female servant” (8c.), a compound of wif “woman” (see wife) + man “human being” (in Old English used in reference to both sexes; see man (n.)). Compare Dutch vrouwmens “wife,” literally “woman-man.”

      Compare that to female.

      https://www.etymonline.com/word/female

      early 14c., female, femele, “woman, human being of the sex which brings forth young,” from Old French femelle “woman, female” (12c.), from Medieval Latin femella “a female,” from Latin femella “young female, girl,” diminutive of femina “woman, a female” (“woman, female,” literally “she who suckles,” from PIE root *dhe(i)- “to suck”).

      Which one seems to you to be more sexist and therefore dehumanizing? The one who’s derived from the concept of a wife as property or the one based on Latin for basically can breastfeed.

      Property v fucking life creator