Discussion:
"condicio" versus "conditio"
(too old to reply)
Daniel Hoehr
2004-02-09 16:44:06 UTC
Permalink
I'm just writing the vocabulary from N&H prelim. exercise H on my
fantastic vocabulary flashcards. Because I do not want to have
English-Latin cards but rather German-Latin cards, I looked up
"conditio" in my terrific dictionary (Prof. Menge's German to Latin,
Latin to German dictionary published by Langenscheidt) and I found
that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").

Could anyone in the know comment on that? I'm quite sure I've seen
"conditio" somewhere else and how can it classified as a "wrong spelling"?

Thanks in advance

Daniel
Rolleston
2004-02-09 16:55:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Hoehr
I'm just writing the vocabulary from N&H prelim. exercise H on my
fantastic vocabulary flashcards. Because I do not want to have
English-Latin cards but rather German-Latin cards, I looked up
"conditio" in my terrific dictionary (Prof. Menge's German to Latin,
Latin to German dictionary published by Langenscheidt) and I found
that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that?
I'm not in the know, but that never stops me:

[L&S, http://tinyurl.com/2x4zs]

condicio (in many MSS. and edd. incorrectly conditio ,
and hence falsely derived from condo; cf. 2. conditio), onis, f.
[condico] , an agreement, stipulation, condition, compact,
proposition, terms, demand.

There are numerous examples of words with the very same
letters on the net. They might be all wrong or not classical. E.g.,

[Aquinas, http://www.dominikanie.pl/tomasz/qda/qda_04t.htm]

Ad tertium dicendum quod conditio recipientis
non potest transferre speciem receptam de uno genere in aliud.

A different shade of meaning there perhaps? It might be
"conditio" as in "state of existence", similar to one sense
of the English "condition". Many other instances
occur in that one text alone.

R.
Daniel Hoehr
2004-02-11 06:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolleston
Post by Daniel Hoehr
I'm just writing the vocabulary from N&H prelim. exercise H on my
fantastic vocabulary flashcards. Because I do not want to have
English-Latin cards but rather German-Latin cards, I looked up
"conditio" in my terrific dictionary (Prof. Menge's German to Latin,
Latin to German dictionary published by Langenscheidt) and I found
that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that?
[L&S, http://tinyurl.com/2x4zs]
condicio (in many MSS. and edd. incorrectly conditio ,
and hence falsely derived from condo; cf. 2. conditio), onis, f.
[condico] , an agreement, stipulation, condition, compact,
proposition, terms, demand.
There are numerous examples of words with the very same
letters on the net. They might be all wrong or not classical. E.g.,
[Aquinas, http://www.dominikanie.pl/tomasz/qda/qda_04t.htm]
Ad tertium dicendum quod conditio recipientis
non potest transferre speciem receptam de uno genere in aliud.
A different shade of meaning there perhaps? It might be
"conditio" as in "state of existence", similar to one sense
of the English "condition". Many other instances
occur in that one text alone.
Might well be. That could also explain why the meaning of "conditio"
as in "state of existence" is also preserved in the German "Kondition".

Hmmmm... to be on the safe side, should I ever use that word in
writing, I'll stick to "condicio".

Thanks!
Post by Rolleston
R.
Daniel
--
"What would you like to drink, Mr. Bund?"
"Communion wine, shaken, not projected."

maf1029 on arcr-c, Mon, 09 Feb 2004
Johannes Patruus
2004-02-09 18:21:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Hoehr
I'm just writing the vocabulary from N&H prelim. exercise H on my
fantastic vocabulary flashcards. Because I do not want to have
English-Latin cards but rather German-Latin cards, I looked up
"conditio" in my terrific dictionary (Prof. Menge's German to Latin,
Latin to German dictionary published by Langenscheidt) and I found
that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that? I'm quite sure I've seen
"conditio" somewhere else and how can it classified as a "wrong spelling"?
Thanks in advance
I refer you to a previous discussion of this point:
http://tinyurl.com/2tnka

Johannes
Daniel Hoehr
2004-02-11 06:42:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johannes Patruus
Post by Daniel Hoehr
I'm just writing the vocabulary from N&H prelim. exercise H on my
fantastic vocabulary flashcards. Because I do not want to have
English-Latin cards but rather German-Latin cards, I looked up
"conditio" in my terrific dictionary (Prof. Menge's German to Latin,
Latin to German dictionary published by Langenscheidt) and I found
that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that? I'm quite sure I've seen
"conditio" somewhere else and how can it classified as a "wrong spelling"?
Thanks in advance
http://tinyurl.com/2tnka
Cheers, Johannes. I'll have a look!
Post by Johannes Patruus
Johannes
Daniel
--
"What would you like to drink, Mr. Bund?"
"Communion wine, shaken, not projected."

maf1029 on arcr-c, Mon, 09 Feb 2004
s***@t-online.de
2004-02-11 07:46:30 UTC
Permalink
... that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that? I'm quite sure I've seen
"conditio" somewhere else and how can it classified as a "wrong spelling"?
Hi Daniel,

As I know the correct spelling in classical Latin - as written by the
Romans - is "condicio" for "contract, condition, circumstances"
because this word traces its origin back to "condico/condicare" = "get
together".

"Conditio" in this respect is used not until the Middle Age. It is not
really wrong but just not classic. Such variations/changes in writing
happened often in that time - especially with vowels, e.g. "fetus"
(cl) - "foetus" (MA), "caelum" (cl) - "coelum" (MA), or "laetitia"
(cl) - "laeticia" (MA).

But: There is also a classical word "conditio" descending from
"condio/condire". However that means "spicing, preserving"
(foodstuffs). And should be a small difference.

Karl
Edward Casey
2004-02-11 11:08:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@t-online.de
... that "conditio, -onis, f" is a "wrong spelling" of "condicio,
condicionis, f". The meanings I find under the "condicio" entry all
sort of match the meaning N&H give us ("terms").
Could anyone in the know comment on that? I'm quite sure I've seen
"conditio" somewhere else and how can it classified as a "wrong spelling"?
Hi Daniel,
As I know the correct spelling in classical Latin - as written by the
Romans - is "condicio" for "contract, condition, circumstances"
because this word traces its origin back to "condico/condicare" = "get
together".
Where did you find condicâre? I have heard of dêdicâre and indicâre and
condîcere but never condicâre. Is this in the OLD or Georges?
Post by s***@t-online.de
"Conditio" in this respect is used not until the Middle Age. It is not
really wrong but just not classic. Such variations/changes in writing
happened often in that time - especially with vowels, e.g. "fetus"
(cl) - "foetus" (MA), "caelum" (cl) - "coelum" (MA), or "laetitia"
(cl) - "laeticia" (MA).
But: There is also a classical word "conditio" descending from
"condio/condire". However that means "spicing, preserving"î
(foodstuffs). And should be a small difference.
Condîtio from condîre and also conditio from condere.

Eduardus
Karl H. Stiebritz
2004-02-12 00:24:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Edward Casey
Post by s***@t-online.de
As I know the correct spelling in classical Latin - as written by the
Romans - is "condicio" for "contract, condition, circumstances"
because this word traces its origin back to "condico/condicare" = "get
together".
Where did you find condicâre? I have heard of dêdicâre and indicâre and
condîcere but never condicâre. Is this in the OLD or Georges?
I'm ashamed for that horrible mistake! You are right: it has to be
"condico/condicere".
To tell you the truth: that wasn't only a typing errror, perhaps the
late hour ...
bob
2004-02-12 01:08:39 UTC
Permalink
Organization: T-Online
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 01:24:27 +0100
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
Post by Edward Casey
Post by s***@t-online.de
As I know the correct spelling in classical Latin - as written by the
Romans - is "condicio" for "contract, condition, circumstances"
because this word traces its origin back to "condico/condicare" = "get
together".
Where did you find condicâre? I have heard of dêdicâre and indicâre and
condîcere but never condicâre. Is this in the OLD or Georges?
I'm ashamed for that horrible mistake! You are right: it has to be
"condico/condicere".
To tell you the truth: that wasn't only a typing errror, perhaps the
late hour ...
Tertullian uses condico (condicere) in the sense of 'to agree with'.
Condicio, postclassically, also means slavery.


Bob
Edward Casey
2004-02-12 06:39:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
Organization: T-Online
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 01:24:27 +0100
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
Post by Edward Casey
Post by s***@t-online.de
As I know the correct spelling in classical Latin - as written by the
Romans - is "condicio" for "contract, condition, circumstances"
because this word traces its origin back to "condico/condicare" = "get
together".
Where did you find condicâre? I have heard of dêdicâre and indicâre and
condîcere but never condicâre. Is this in the OLD or Georges?
I'm ashamed for that horrible mistake! You are right: it has to be
"condico/condicere".
To tell you the truth: that wasn't only a typing errror, perhaps the
late hour ...
Tertullian uses condico (condicere) in the sense of 'to agree with'.
Condicio, postclassically, also means slavery.
Bob
As someone already noted, there may be three or four words,
condicio(condîcere) and conditio(condere) and condîtio(condîre). If
condicio is from condîcere(say together, agree) then why do no
dictionaries show condicio (*condîcio) with the vowel produced? Then there
is dicio,dicionis (sway, sovereignty), so there could be conjunct
sovereignty (condicio).

Eduardus
bob
2004-02-12 16:43:49 UTC
Permalink
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:39:53 -0600
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
If
condicio is from condîcere(say together, agree) then why do no
dictionaries show condicio (*condîcio) with the vowel produced? Then there
is dicio,dicionis (sway, sovereignty), so there could be conjunct
sovereignty (condicio).
Tucker, in his "Etymological Dictionary of Latin" (1931, reprinted 1985)
says: ...With dico. (The form conditio is generally rejected, but was
perhaps also correct (< condo), the senses having in some cases coalesced.
This is essentially the position set forth in Lewis and Short, whereby
condctio and cconditio are rejected as equivalents, and condicio < condo is
dismissed. Lewis and Short crossreferences to conditio (2.) and seems to
espouse condico for both forms.

Dicio is obviously related to dico, which in turn is analogous to Sanskrit
dicati (shows), Greek deiknumi, O.E. teon, taecan. An older root *deik-, has
been conjectured.

What I conclude from this is that no one really knows, although, if we were
to trust sight, deico and condico would seem to make good cases for
themselves, while Tucker's conflation of condo and condico is not, despite
Lewis and Short's caveat to the contrary, out of line or, for that matter,
an unheard of occurrence, which, I fear, still leaves us in a nowhere which
is less than utopian.

By the way, I didn't quite understand what you meant by 'with the vowel
produced".

I'm off for a swim now: must attend to my cellulite.


Bob
Edward Casey
2004-02-14 18:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:39:53 -0600
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
If
condicio is from condîcere(say together, agree) then why do no
dictionaries show condicio (*condîcio) with the vowel produced? Then there
is dicio,dicionis (sway, sovereignty), so there could be conjunct
sovereignty (condicio).
Tucker, in his "Etymological Dictionary of Latin" (1931, reprinted 1985)
says: ...With dico. (The form conditio is generally rejected, but was
perhaps also correct (< condo), the senses having in some cases coalesced.
This is essentially the position set forth in Lewis and Short, whereby
condctio and cconditio are rejected as equivalents, and condicio < condo is
dismissed. Lewis and Short crossreferences to conditio (2.) and seems to
espouse condico for both forms.
Dicio is obviously related to dico, which in turn is analogous to Sanskrit
dicati (shows), Greek deiknumi, O.E. teon, taecan. An older root *deik-, has
been conjectured.
What I conclude from this is that no one really knows, although, if we were
to trust sight, deico and condico would seem to make good cases for
themselves, while Tucker's conflation of condo and condico is not, despite
Lewis and Short's caveat to the contrary, out of line or, for that matter,
an unheard of occurrence, which, I fear, still leaves us in a nowhere which
is less than utopian.
By the way, I didn't quite understand what you meant by 'with the vowel
produced".
Just that if "condicio" is from "condîcere" (condeekere) then it should be
pronounced "condeekio" but it's not. Produced vowels are vocales
productae. I don't know whether my circumflexes are getting through or
not. If there appear to be letters missing, you might see them if you
switch the encoding to UTF8. That's what I use most of the time. If there
a missing letters in what I recieve, I can usually make them visible by
switching the encoding to Western European or Windows.

Eduardus
bob
2004-02-16 21:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:15:56 -0600
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
Just that if "condicio" is from "condîcere" (condeekere) then it should be
pronounced "condeekio" but it's not. Produced vowels are vocales
productae
Not necessarily or universally so. Consonant stems often change or weaken
the stem vowel in compounding and/or suffixing:

tego>toga>tugurium.

dIcO>diciO>dicax

condIco>condicio>condicitius

In the case of DIcO, the original root was probably *deik-, which, by
current wisdom, resolves the diphthong (apparently stressed on the <i>
component into long <i>.

rego regio

rex rEgis rEgius rEgia rEgIna rEgAlis

With the rego/rex group we see the semantical, and possibly structural,
coalescing of two different roots: (reig?rego and rEg?rex, regius, etc.

I have found no hard and fast rule to cover all these situations.
Gildersleeve merely makes the observation of change or weakening, with no
presentation of a rule for consistently generating such changes.

Allen and Greenough 231b observe the following:

With a long vowel[1][The difference in vowel-quantity in the same root (as
DUC) depends on inherited variations (see § 17. a).]: as, lúc-is (lúx), LUC;
pác-is (páx). So in verbs: dúc-ó, í-s for eis, from eó, íre; fátur from
fárí.

I found nothing better in the vowel gradation tables in Sihler, nor in his
treatment of accent and gradation in consonant stems, although he observes
interestiong structural and formative similarities vis a vis gradation
between more or less congenial languages such as O.Ir. and Latin, e,g.,
O.Ir. ri, gen. rig<* rIks, *rIgos (root*reH1g-be efficacious). However, none
of this does much for me beyond reinforcing my agnosticism and strengthening
my faith, if you will, in the sight similarities. Not scientific, but the
best I can come up with at this time.

Is it my imagination, or can I hear you laughing?

Bob
Edward Casey
2004-02-17 16:35:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Newsgroups: alt.language.latin
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:15:56 -0600
Subject: Re: "condicio" versus "conditio"
Just that if "condicio" is from "condîcere" (condeekere) then it should be
pronounced "condeekio" but it's not. Produced vowels are vocales
productae
Not necessarily or universally so. Consonant stems often change or weaken
tego>toga>tugurium.
dIcO>diciO>dicax
condIco>condicio>condicitius
Agreed, but, not having Ernout or what's his name, the German guy, I base
my observations on a kind of semi-learned folk etymology. If condîre leads
to condîtio then I don't see why condîcere doesn't produce condîcio. I
think the word has been polluted by some kind of etymological anastomosis.
Something like this may have happened to shades of meaning in the triplet
êdûcô, edîcô, êducô. If the first is "rearing" and the last is "training
for adulthood" then maybe the idea of "saying" has somehow mediated
between the two of them. It also may be that many of these correptions and
productions were introduced just to make a difference among related words,
parts of speech, etc. as in dux,ducis,duce and dûco,dûcis,dûce. Another
example is "dicis" as in dicis ergo, dicis causa.
Under "condicio" Forcellini says to see "conditio." There he says "proprie
est actus condendi, factio, opus; *fattura, opera, creazione* but then he
admits "quo sensu tamen non reperitur in usu, nisi apud Scriptores
Ecclesiasticos."
Btw, I don't find that "condicitius" but "condicticius."
Post by bob
In the case of DIcO, the original root was probably *deik-, which, by
current wisdom, resolves the diphthong (apparently stressed on the <i>
component into long <i>.
rego regio
rex rEgis rEgius rEgia rEgIna rEgAlis
With the rego/rex group we see the semantical, and possibly structural,
coalescing of two different roots: (reig?rego and rEg?rex, regius, etc.
I have found no hard and fast rule to cover all these situations.
Gildersleeve merely makes the observation of change or weakening, with no
presentation of a rule for consistently generating such changes.
With a long vowel[1][The difference in vowel-quantity in the same root (as
DUC) depends on inherited variations (see § 17. a).]: as, lúc-is (lúx), LUC;
pác-is (páx). So in verbs: dúc-ó, í-s for eis, from eó, íre; fátur from
fárí.
I found nothing better in the vowel gradation tables in Sihler, nor in his
treatment of accent and gradation in consonant stems, although he observes
interestiong structural and formative similarities vis a vis gradation
between more or less congenial languages such as O.Ir. and Latin, e,g.,
O.Ir. ri, gen. rig<* rIks, *rIgos (root*reH1g-be efficacious). However, none
of this does much for me beyond reinforcing my agnosticism and
strengthening
Post by bob
my faith, if you will, in the sight similarities. Not scientific, but the
best I can come up with at this time.
Is it my imagination, or can I hear you laughing?
Not laughing at all. In fact, I am grateful for your observations,
learning, input. I tend to give greater authority to the nineteenth
century philologists than to latter-day ones and even more to the Italian
spoken tradition than to German speculation. The Germans seem to wish to
subsume grammar under logic, which is certainly preposterous. The true
hierarchy is logic, grammar, literature, life. Each lower catagory forms
only a small part of and is only abstracted from the higher category that
engenders it. (I may have left out some intermediate categories).

Eduardus
Edwin Menes
2004-02-17 22:13:27 UTC
Permalink
I suspect the simple answer to the question that started this whole
thread is the pronunciation of Latin in the Middle Ages in Northern
Europe. There was no qualitative difference between long and short
vowels. And -tio and -cio were pronounced the same (-sio in France,
-tsio in Germany). Since there are far more words ending in -tio than
in -cio, spelling mistakes tended toward -tio, and eventually -tio
replaced -cio, etymology notwithstanding.

Loading...