On Thu 21 Jan 2021 at 01:14:31 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: > David Wright composed on 2021-01-20 23:58 (UTC-0600): > > On Wed 20 Jan 2021 at 21:17:30 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: > > >> When I want TV I use a TV and remote controller and an easy chair or sofa, > >> not a > >> workchair and desk and rodent and keyboard and all the distractions of > >> multitasking. My computers are general purpose tools for getting work > >> done. Most > >> videos are primarily time devouring entertainers, amusement. > > >> a (as first letter as affects meaning of word): anti or not > > >> muse: v: to think or ruminate upon. > > >> thus: > > >> amuse: literally not think or unthink > > > Ouch. It's derived from French: the à means to/at, not anti/without. > > In many cases yes. It has several others as well, such as in avocation. In > others, > such as amuse, clearly not to or at: > > "a- (3) > > prefix meaning "not, without," from Greek a-, an- "not" (the "alpha > privative"), > from PIE root *ne- "not" (source also of English un-).
Quite simply, you arbitrarily picked the wrong choice (3) and skipped over: a- (1) […] In words from Romanic languages, often it represents reduced forms of Latin ad "to, toward; for" (see ad-), or ab "from, away, off" (see ab-); both of which by about 7c. had been reduced to a in the ancestor of Old French. In a few cases it represents Latin ex. > In words from Greek, such as abysmal, adamant, amethyst; also partly > nativized as > a prefix of negation (asexual, amoral, agnostic). The ancient alpha privatum, > denoting want or absence." > https://www.etymonline.com/word/a- On Thu 21 Jan 2021 at 10:14:03 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote: > > https://www.etymonline.com/word/amuse states that this is the "to, at" > > prefix from Latin in a sense of "causing to", not the "not, without" one > > from Greek. > > Funnily [oops, I guess I meant "amusingly"] enough, the two end up > meaning kind of the same: in that what happens is that attention is > diverted, so when you "amuse", you cause thinking of something which > prevents thinking of what you'd have been thinking of if it weren't for > that amusement. But that *is* just a fanciful rationalisation of a false dichotomy. I can find no hint of negation in the etymology of amuse. Cheers, David.
