Etymology of anthropo-

[nq:1]I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W and OED give 'anthropos' as GR man, but as 'an' is no or without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
No: the "an-" in anthrOpos isn't privative, being part of the root.

Odysseus

[nq:1]Greetings, I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W and OED give 'anthropos' as GR man, but as 'an' is no or without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
Not everthing starting with a- is the privative.
Buck says the etymology is much disputed, but goes for the traditional anthr- + o:pos, with anthr- a variant of ane:r / andros, and o:pos the usual eyes/face

[nq:1]I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W and OED give 'anthropos' as GR man, but as 'an' is no or without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
Greek is not rigid like that. The geographic
name Athenai was not Non-Thenai, Achilles
was not Non-Chilles and so on.

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[nq:1]Greetings, I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W and OED give 'anthropos' as GR man, but as 'an' is no or without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
Likewise,
"unguent" = "un-" + "guent" = "not guent"
"foreign" = "fore-" + "ign" = "the front part of an ign" "reptile" = "re-" + "ptile" = "to ptile again"
"decency" = "de-" + "cency" = "to remove t

[nq:2]I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W ... without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
[nq:1]No: the "an-" in anthrOpos isn't privative, being part of the root.[/nq]
Further on the question: The Greek "alpha privative", derived from Proto-Indo-European *n-, appears as a- before a consonant, and as an- only before a vowel. Thus, the very shape of the word

< in
[nq:2]Greetings, I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My ... without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
[nq:1]Likewise, "unguent" = "un-" + "guent" = "not guent"[/nq]
Much easier than 'gwynedd and powys and deheubarth'!
[nq:1]"foreign" = "fore-" + "ign" = "the front part of an ign"[/nq]
No, no, no: it's an extinct fire.
[nq:1]"reptile" = "re-"

[nq:2]I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My M-W ... without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
[nq:1]Greek is not rigid like that. The geographic name Athenai was not Non-Thenai, Achilles was not Non-Chilles and so on.[/nq]
Thank you to the several people who disabused me of the simplistic error of my conjecture.

-het

"The various modes of worsh

[nq:2]Greetings, I am wondering about the root of anthropo-. My ... without, I wonder is 'thropos' a valid ancient GR word?[/nq]
[nq:1]Likewise, "unguent" = "un-" + "guent" = "not guent" "foreign" = "fore-" + "ign" = "the front part of an ... + "ure" = "after the ure" We just need to find out what guent, ign, ptile, cency, and ure are.[/nq]
Not disagreeing but OTOH, a favorite word of mine

[nq:1]Not disagreeing but OTOH, a favorite word of mine, preposterous. How can something be pre and post at the same time?[/nq]
It would be preposterous to think that something can be.

Seriously, that's the point the implication of the word is that a thing's hind portion is in front, an absurdity.

[nq:2]Not disagreeing but OTOH, a favorite word of mine, preposterous. How can something be pre and post at the same time?[/nq]
[nq:1]It would be preposterous to think that something can be. Seriously, that's the point the implication of the word is that a thing's hind portion is in front, an absurdity.[/nq]
Cf. "bass-ackwards".

Odysseus