From Disco to Disciple : Ninth Week

My chosen word for this week is “disciple.” Johnson defines it this way, “A scholar; one that professes to receive instructions from another.” The etymological trail of the word is interesting, but Johnson gives us only the first step. He states that “disciple” comes from the Latin word discipulus. Upon consulting the Lewis and Short lexicon, A Latin Dictionary, one finds discipulus defined as “a learner, scholar, pupil, disciple.” Johnson and Lewis and Short use very similar definitions. However, Lewis and Short offer a longer trail to follow, deepening our understanding. This is accomplished through the etymology.

The Latin dictionary writes that discipulus is formed from disco and “the root of puer, pupilla.” Thus far, the train of words leading to “disciple” are: discipulus, disco, and the root of puer or pupilla. Should any be imagining a young John Travolta and wondering if disco has anything to do with the clipped English word spelled the same way: Indeed, it does not! As it happens, the English noun “disco” is a shortened form of the French loan word discothéque, which carries the general meaning of a place were recorded music is played for dancing.

What then does disco mean in Latin? Lewis and Short give this usage: “to learn, to learn to know, to become acquainted with, etc.” This dovetails nicely with one part of disciple – the aspect of learning. However, the learning subject remains, being found in the other two words forming the base for discipulus. These can be considered as a unit. Puer has the general meaning of “child,” and pupilla the meaning of “orphan” or “ward.” Taken together, the result is one, typically a youth, who is under the authority and responsibility of another.  In sum, disco, puer, and pupilla describe a learner under the responsibility of a teacher. This combination equates exactly with discipulus and in turn, disciple – the learning follower and devotee.   

The path from Latin discipulus to English “disciple” might very simply be said to begin with discipulus, be taken into French as disciple, and end by being incorporated without alteration of spelling into English as “disciple.” This, of course, is a gross oversimplification of a process involving multiple generations of time and miles necessary for its development.

Simple it may be, but the idea is the basis for proving the reasoning behind the language. Anyone can make up words and pronounce their designated meanings. Is that language? I say no. Language has to have logic behind it. There is more to what we speak and write than mere tradition. Without reason, a language can only be subjective and, when considered critically, must be subject to changes based on the whims of the user. One of the foundational pillars of communication is its capacity for consistent repetition among its users. The lack of repetitive ability is a source of division. One of the great historical divisions between ethnic groups is the barrier of uncommunicable language.

One can hardly think of a more important subject among human beings than communication. Imagine what sort of existence human beings would have if they could not communicate with one another. I dare say, human survival as a whole depends on language of some sort. What is more, societal advancement beyond rudimentary survival requires a precisely reasoned language capable of subtle expression and flexible enough to expand with the inventive and poetic minds of mankind. Casting away or neglecting the importance of human communication is to disregard a basic and beautiful part of what it means to be human. The antidote begins by recognizing the importance and value of understanding how our language came to us.

Until next week.

John

I have added a link to the Lewis and Short Latin dictionary from Internet Archive. You can find it in the links area on the right side of the page. Enjoy!