# From fence to enclosed plot of ground



## ThomasK

When I was ten years younger, I asked a questions about various types of fences, and now I am making the next move: do you have words that have moved (semantically) from [ a word meaning] fence, wall, .... to the enclosed plot? So some kind of totum pro parte metonymy....

We all know _town _and _tuin_ in Dutch based on a fence, still called _Zaun _in German. Now I found out that The Hague is of course a city, but the name refers to the hedge or any enclosure surrounding it (hedges were not strictly hedges, so I understand).


----------



## Penyafort

In *Catalan*, the derived words are so related that there is no need for movement, as they belong to the same family:

*tancar *= to close (in general)​> *tanca *= fence (in general)​> *tancat *= (participle) closed | (noun) enclosure​*barra *= bar​> *barrar *= to close (with bars)​> *barrat *= barred enclosure​*cloure *= to close (restricted usage)​> *clos -a* = (adj, part.) closed, enclosed | (noun) enclosure​
The only example I can think of which could be an extension in meaning is *cleda*, which means both the very simple fence made with perpendicular wooden sticks and the enclosure resulting from using this type of fence. (I don't know if there's a name in English. *This *is a cleda.)
​


----------



## ThomasK

Penyafort said:


> In *Catalan*, the derived words are so related that there is no need for movement, as they belong to the same family:
> 
> *tancar *= to close (in general)​> *tanca *= fence (in general)​> *tancat *= (participle) closed | (noun) enclosure​*barra *= bar​> *barrar *= to close (with bars)​> *barrat *= barred enclosure​*cloure *= to close (restricted usage)​> *clos -a* = (adj, part.) closed, enclosed | (noun) enclosure​
> The only example I can think of which could be an extension in meaning is *cleda*, which means both the very simple fence made with perpendicular wooden sticks and the enclosure resulting from using this type of fence. (I don't know if there's a name in English. *This *is a cleda.)
> ​


Thanks a lot. So indeed, in the first the link with a verb is clear, and those are fairly predictible, whereas in the secon there is a semantic shift, I could say, I suppose...


----------



## apmoy70

Greek:

The verb is *«φράζω»* [ˈfra.zo̞] --> _to fence in, hedge around, enclose, barricade, fortify, block_ < Classical v. *«φράσσω» pʰrắssō* (idem), Attic *«φράττω» pʰrắttō* (of unclear etymology, the traditional connection with Latin farcīre & frequēns is quite uncertain).

Fence is *«φράκτης/φράχτης»* [ˈfra.ktis] (masc.) & (colloq.) [ˈfra.xtis] (masc.) with dissimilation < Classical deverbative masc. noun *«φράκτης» pʰrắktēs* < v. «φράσσω» (see above). «Φράκτης/φράχτης» is this.

*«Περίφραξη»* [pe̞ˈɾi.fra.k͡si] (fem.) is this < Classical 3rd declension feminine noun *«περίφραξις» pĕrípʰrăksis* --> _fencing round, enclosure_, a compound: Preposition and prefix *«περί» pĕrí* + v. «φράσσω» (see earlier).

The word for dam is also related: *«Φράγμα»* [ˈfraɣ.ma] (neut.) < Classical neut. noun *«φράγμα» pʰrắgmă* (neut.) & *«φάρχμα» pʰắrkʰmă* (neut.) --> _fence, breast-work, screen, protection, partition-wall_, both deverbative from «φράσσω».


----------



## ThomasK

INteresting. However, there is one difference, I think: in the case of _town _and _The Hague,_ any reference to the original fence meaning has got lost. In Greek there seems to be a cluster of _fence _words/ derivations, where the link remains clear, or so I guess... I think the same holds for most Catalan words, as Penyafort indicated, but cleda seems to be the only example of what s/he describes as "an extension of meaning", which is probably a better word than "a semantic shift', which I used: those shifts often seem quite strange. Cleda, town, The Hague, don't when we are aware of the original meaning...


----------



## Demiurg

ThomasK said:


> We all know _town _and _tuin_ in Dutch based on a fence, still called _Zaun _in German. Now I found out that The Hague is of course a city, but the name refers to the hedge or any enclosure surrounding it (hedges were not strictly hedges, so I understand).


In German, we have the (dated) word "Hag" for that. And derived town names like "Hagen" and "Haag".


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks. I have been thinking of some more:
- _*quay *_is probably a good example: it referred to a hedge or fence in Welsh, although... I must admit: it seems to have been derived from the Old Celtic verb **kagio*- (to encompass, enclose), which was derived from some other root, which it has in common with  Welsh* cae* "fence, hedge" --- So not a perfect example, the same way that enclosure is not a perfect example
- *paradise*: it refers to "building (deiza - pairi/ peri) around", so I understand from etymonline.com, not from a wall as such...


----------



## ThomasK

It might even be worse (as for me at least): _town, Zaun, tui_n are all based on an underlying verb of enclosing. So not so sure if we can really say that the fence came first...


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> When I was ten years younger, I asked a questions about various types of fences, and now I am making the next move: do you have words that have moved (semantically) from [ a word meaning] fence, wall, .... to the enclosed plot?


Old Russian городъ (gorodŭ > gorod) used to mean "wall, fence", "fortress" and "city" altogether; however, in Russian the meaning of "город" is restricted to the latter. Still, one should bear in mind that the meaning "wall" is likely secondary in the first place, since the usually reconstructed Proto-Balto-Slavic meaning of *gardas is "enclosure"  (cf. also Proto-Germanic *gardaz with basically the same meaning).


----------



## ThomasK

Interesting information. However, the main point to me is that the whole e-story begins with a wall, so with something concrete. But is the root the same as the one of 'garden', 'jardin'? I guess, as Slavic languages belong to the IE-group.


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> Interesting information. However, the main point to me is that the whole e-story begins with a wall, so with something concrete. But is the root the same as the one of 'garden', 'jardin'? I guess, as Slavic languages belong to the IE-group.


Germanic and Slavic languages are generally more closely related than that, which is, however, not really relevant here, since we find reflexes of *gʰerdʰ- even in Anatolian languages.
"Garden" was loaned from Old French, where it comes from Frankish; the native English counterpart is "yard". All these come from Proto-Germanic *gardaz, from PIE *gʰerdʰ-, which is also the origin of the proto-Slavic *gordŭ.


----------



## ThomasK

In the end: is the most fundamental root not a verb, like "to enclose" or something the like? From what you write, the enclosure as such can be considered the underlying, etymological root meaning, I guess, but the PIE *_gʰerdʰ_- is a verb rather... Or?


----------



## Włoskipolak 72

Polish

fence = płot

          = ogrodzenie from *Ogrodzić*,(verb) _w znacz_. 1) obwarować, zabezpieczyć (fortify , secure)

          = obwiedzenie from obwieść,  obwodzić (verb)«otoczyć czymś dookoła» to surround , ring

hedge = żywopłot

*Obwiedzenie*, okolenie, otoczenie, okrążenie, = embordering , encirclement , wreath

zamek = castle
zamek (np. do drzwi )  = door lock


*zamykać *(verb) = close , lock

*zamknąć; zatrzasnąć; zaryglować* =close ,steek , shut

zamknąć, *zapiąć* = fasten

*zawrzeć , zawierać się* = close


----------



## Cork Irish

The Irish for fence is *claí* (*claidhe* in the 1950s spelling).

In Irish English, a "fence" is often called "a ditch". I found an explanation in the _Irish Times_:


> A word he doesn’t mention, strangely enough, is “ditch”, although I think this is one of the classic Irish-English differences. In fact, even in Ireland, what you understand by the word “ditch” may be a socio-religious identifier, a bit like the aitch/haitch question. And the fascinating aspect, to me, is that it’s just two ways of looking at the same thing.
> 
> The original ditches were created by digging trenches, as boundaries and/or irrigation. But to the English, the ditch is the trench. Whereas in Ireland, the ditch is the raised bank of earth and the hedgerow on top. (As for the trench, where I come from that’s a sheugh.)
> 
> This misunderstanding is highlighted every year at the Aintree Grand National, when several fences in, commentators will always refer to the “first open ditch”.



Then in the Etymological Dictionary of Scottish Gaelic (which until the 1700s was effectively the same language as Irish, and so the etymology entries are valid for Irish too):



> *cladh*, churchyard, Ir. _cladh_, a bank, ditch, E. Ir. _clad_, a ditch, W. _cladd_, _clawdd_, fossa, Cor. _cledh_ (do.), Br. _cleuz_ (do.), _*klado-_, _*klâdo_; root _kela_, _kla_, break, split, hit; Gr. _κλαδαρός_, easily broken; Lat. _clâdes_; Russ. _kladu_, cut. See further _claidheamh_, sword. Hence *cladhaich*, dig.
> 
> *cladhaire*, a poltroon, so Ir.; "digger, clod-hopper", from _cladh_?



So I see the Russian word *кладу* there, and that dictionary says it means "cut", but I think it is "I put" in modern Russian. The Irish word for "fence", *claí*, is thus related to that, and so is the word for "sword", which was spelt *claidheamh*, but is now spelt *claíomh* (/kli:v/).

I didn't previously realise that *cladhaire* /kləirʲi/, which means "trickster; coward" in modern Irish is related to *claí*, via the meaning "clodhopper".

There are lots of Irish words starting clad- and cladh- that are probably related to all of these words (in distant etymology).


----------



## ThomasK

This is a very interesting note indeed. 

1. *fence/ ditch/ wall*: I recognize that from Dutch as well: a _wal _is like the original _wall_, I think, something like a defensive dyke, which might then lead to a ditch. That might be the most common meaning of wal in our dialects. _[BTW: The famous/ notorious red light district in Amsterdam is situated along canals:_ de Wallen (walletjes)_],_ but then we also talk about aarden wallen [earthen...], which seems to show that the ditch meaning is the most common one.
Funny:  the _vallum _in Latum, referred to a stake, a post. Because there was a stake wall above (or in?) the wall? 

But 
2. However: has this ever referred to the surface enclosed? In Dutch you might say that it has: de Wallen has come to refer to the whole zone, the banks of the wallen/canals. Yet, that is at one place, in Amsterdam, I cannot see the meaning turning up elsewhere. 
Not in Irish either, I guess. What is the case is: such a wall implies quite an area and so it is both a fence (...) and an area.


----------



## ThomasK

> Włoskipolak 72 said:
> Polish
> 
> fence = płot
> 
> = ogrodzenie from *Ogrodzić*,(verb) _w znacz_.< 1) obwarować, zabezpieczyć (fortify , secure)
> 
> = obwiedzenie from obwieść, obwodzić (verb) < ??? «otoczyć czymś dookoła» to surround , ring
> 
> hedge = żywopłot
> 
> *Obwiedzenie*, okolenie, otoczenie, okrążenie, = embordering , encirclement , wreath
> 
> zamek = castle
> zamek (np. do drzwi ) = door lock > *zamykać *(verb) = TO close , lock


l Is it correct to say that three or four roots/... can be related to fence, viz. _*plot*_, *o*_*grod*_- , _*ob*_*wied*, etc. and that there is mainly one word for closing, locking, based on (???) _*zamek*_, castle??? Are those the root words? Are they all nouns?


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> Is it correct to say that three roots/... can be related to fence, viz. plot, ogrod- , obwied, etc. and that there is mainly one word for closing, locking, based on (???) zmake, castle??? Are those the root words? Are they all nouns?


I have to remind that nouns and verbs are syntactical, not semantic concepts (even though there is a tendency that most words with natural material denotates are found in one syntactical class and most word denoting physical activities appear in another one). However, it's not uncommon for nouns to be semantic predicates (i.e. to have a definition which necessarily incorporates various actions and other entities), even when morphologically they don't seem to be derived from any verb. Furthermore, sometimes it becomes quite difficult to decide what is derived from what, when the languages morphology contains some sort of ambivalent relationship between nouns and verbs. In English nouns are easily verbalized without a change, but verbs normally demand some additional morphological operations to be turned into nouns. However, compare Early Old Russian/Late Proto-Slavic:
sadŭ "garden" vs. saditi "to make smb sit, to seat smb/sth; to plant" - where the verbal part is certainly more basic;
voskŭ "wax" vs. voščiti "to wax" - where it's the other way around, even though the morphological relationships are identical.


----------



## Awwal12

And something closer to the topic, but also related; consider Old Russian gorodŭ (city; fortress; fence, wall) vs. goroditi (to put a fence/a wall) vs. ogorodŭ (something encircled with a fence; a garden, a vegetable garden in particular).


----------



## ThomasK

Awwal12 said:


> I have to remind that nouns and verbs are syntactical, not semantic concepts (even though there is a tendency that most words with natural material denotates are found in one syntactical class and most word denoting physical activities appear in another one).


Don't you think that those syntactical (morpho...?) categories have some semantic aspect? I mean: I' say that nouns are often derived from verbs but then denote an action, a collection, a result, etc. or that they at least refer to some kind of semantic -concepts? 
_I'd like to know whether that is a topic treated or researched in semantics? Isn't the distinction between syntactics and semantics the longer the vaguer? _


Awwal12 said:


> However, it's not uncommon for nouns to be semantic predicates (i.e. to have a definition which necessarily incorporates various actions and other entities), even when morphologically they don't seem to be derived from any verb.


I was too quick, I suppose: this might refer to my note, but it is even broader, I guess, but I must simply admit that I am not sure at all that I quite understand what you mean... 


Awwal12 said:


> Furthermore, sometimes it becomes quite difficult to decide what is derived from what, when the languages morphology contains some sort of ambivalent relationship between nouns and verbs. In English nouns are easily verbalized without a change, but verbs normally demand some additional morphological operations to be turned into nouns. However, compare Early Old Russian/Late Proto-Slavic:
> sadŭ "garden" vs. saditi "to make smb sit, to seat smb/sth; to plant" - where the verbal part is certainly more basic;
> voskŭ "wax" vs. voščiti "to wax" - where it's the other way around, even though the morphological relationships are identical.


I think that is what _I hinted at: what category constitutes the (oldest) root. 

But it might be better to take further notes on this question to the EHL forum. Please wait a while before answering until this evening... _


----------



## Włoskipolak 72

ThomasK said:


> l Is it correct to say that three or four roots/... can be related to fence, viz. _*plot*_, *o*_*grod*_- , _*ob*_*wied*, etc. and that there is mainly one word for closing, locking, based on (???) _*zamek*_, castle??? Are those the root words? Are they all nouns?


Let's see 

*płot* comes from  Proto-Slavic *plotъ,* cognate with Upper Sorbian płót, Polish płot, Polish *pleść*, Czech plot, Serbo-Croatian plot.
pleść (verb)= plait


From  Proto-Balto-Slavic *gardas*, from Proto-Indo-European *gʰordʰ-os, from *gʰerdʰ.
Proto -Slavic  *gordъ , gród* (Polish) , stronghold , fortress, city. Cyrillic *= градъ. *

Proto - Slavic *ogorďenьje* = *ogrodzenie *(Polish)

*Obwiedzenie = obwieść *(verb), (imperfective *obwodzić*) to outline, to border, to frame.
From  *ob*- +‎ *wieść*. (to lead, conduct)

From Proto-Slavic **vestì *(stem *ved-), from Proto-Balto-Slavic **wedtei*, from Proto-Indo-European *wedʰ-.
Baltic cognates include Lithuanian vèsti (“to lead”), Latvian vest (“to lead”).

Homophone: *wieźć *(to carry, to transport by vehicle; to drive)
From Proto-Slavic *veztì (stem *vez-), from Proto-Indo-European *wéǵʰeti (“to be transporting”), *weǵʰ- (“to transport”).


It seems that verbs *zamknąć, zamykać *have different roots..;

*zamknąć *(verb)pf (_imperfective_ *zamykać*) , to close, to shut, to lock

From Proto-Slavic **zamъknǫti*; equivalent to *za*- +‎ *mknąć , *from Proto-Slavic **mъknǫti*. = to scamper, to rush, to speed, to hare.


----------



## Awwal12

Włoskipolak 72 said:


> Cyrillic *= градъ. *


Not just "Cyrillic", but (Old) Church Slavonic, with the standard South Slavic /TorT/ > /TraT/ development (vs. West Slavic /TroT/ and East Slavic /ToroT/). In Russian the loanword "grad" still exists as an elevated/poetic/religious counterpart to the native "gorod" (also homonymous to the native "grad" - "hail", from *gradŭ).


----------



## ThomasK

Włoskipolak 72 said:


> Let's see
> 
> *płot* comes from  Proto-Slavic *plotъ,* cognate with Upper Sorbian płót, Polish płot, Polish *pleść*, Czech plot, Serbo-Croatian plot.
> pleść (verb)= plait


So this is a fence, but does not refer to a plot of ground... 


Włoskipolak 72 said:


> From  Proto-Balto-Slavic *gardas*, from Proto-Indo-European *gʰordʰ-os, from *gʰerdʰ.
> Proto -Slavic  *gordъ , gród* (Polish) , stronghold , fortress, city. Cyrillic *= градъ. *
> 
> Proto - Slavic *ogorďenьje* = *ogrodzenie *(Polish)


So *city *but maybe not fence as such, but wall as well (Awwal12 in #18) 


Włoskipolak 72 said:


> *Obwiedzenie = obwieść *(verb), (imperfective *obwodzić*) to outline, to border, to frame.
> From  *ob*- +‎ *wieść*. (to lead, conduct)
> 
> From Proto-Slavic **vestì *(stem *ved-), from Proto-Balto-Slavic **wedtei*, from Proto-Indo-European *wedʰ-.
> Baltic cognates include Lithuanian vèsti (“to lead”), Latvian vest (“to lead”).


Can you say that o*bwieść *has to do with material) borders (being walls, fences, ...)? 
=/= (is not the same as) what follows


Włoskipolak 72 said:


> Homophone: *wieźć *(to carry, to transport by vehicle; to drive)
> From Proto-Slavic *veztì (stem *vez-), from Proto-Indo-European *wéǵʰeti (“to be transporting”), *weǵʰ- (“to transport”).





Włoskipolak 72 said:


> It seems that verbs *zamknąć, zamykać *have different roots..;
> 
> *zamknąć *(verb)pf (_imperfective_ *zamykać*) , to close, to shut, to lock
> 
> From Proto-Slavic **zamъknǫti*; equivalent to *za*- +‎ *mknąć , *from Proto-Slavic **mъknǫti*. = to scamper, to rush, to speed, to hare.


Not sure whether closing, shutting, locking can be done using fences, wells, etc. But can one say that a castle (zamek) is a kind of *locked-up place*? 

Conclusion: we might say perhaps that *zamknac *and *gardas *show up a link between fence/ wall and plot (town or fortification), QED, but the *obwiesc *is not quite clear as for that...


----------



## Cork Irish

ThomasK, you said *obwieść *is not the same as *wieźć*. All Slavic languages make a distinction between verbs meaning "to lead" and "to convey, transport". These are not the same verbs or roots.

Probably what you meant was that *wieść *just means "lead", whereas *obwieść *means "encircle", and probably many other meanings too. This is because the prefix ob- means "around". Literally "to lead around", as of drawing a border around.

In Russian обвести can also mean "encircle, outline", but as you have pointed out this has nothing to do with words for "fence" or "town".


----------



## Awwal12

Cork Irish said:


> Probably what you meant was that *wieść *just means "lead", whereas *obwieść *means "encircle", and probably many other meanings too.


Sure (cf. Russian vestí "to lead", obvestí "to surround by some sort of line" - with the direct object allowing to be more specific; veztí "to carry in a vehicle or on an animal" is unrelated, despite being homophonous).


----------



## ThomasK

Cork Irish said:


> ThomasK, you said *obwieść *is not the same as *wieźć*. All Slavic languages make a distinction between verbs meaning "to lead" and "to convey, transport". These are not the same verbs or roots.
> 
> Probably what you meant was that *wieść *just means "lead", whereas *obwieść *means "encircle", and probably many other meanings too. This is because the prefix ob- means "around". Literally "to lead around", as of drawing a border around.
> 
> In Russian обвести can also mean "encircle, outline", but as you have pointed out this has nothing to do with words for "fence" or "town".


Well, did I.  Włoskipolak 72 made a distinction, I thought, but it was not clear to me at all. However, I have not even tried to suggest anything else. 

The only thing (well, ...) I am interested in is: can this  obwieść, encircle, refer to anything material/ concrete? I guess not, yet, one could imagine that enclosing/... often implies a hedge, fence or something else...


----------



## Sobakus

ThomasK said:


> Don't you think that those syntactical (morpho...?) categories have some semantic aspect? I mean: I' say that nouns are often derived from verbs but then denote an action, a collection, a result, etc. or that they at least refer to some kind of semantic -concepts?
> _I'd like to know whether that is a topic treated or researched in semantics? Isn't the distinction between syntactics and semantics the longer the vaguer? _
> 
> I think that is what _I hinted at: what category constitutes the (oldest) root. _


You may be interested in this: Bozzone, C. (2014). The Origin of the Caland System and the Typology of Adjectives as well as this: Lexical aspect / Aktionsart on Wikipedia. This area of research is called lexical semantics. To quote yet another paper:


> Thus, C[aland]S[system] morphology is found on roots that could informally be termed ‘prototypically adjectival’ or ‘state-oriented’. These are roots that express ‘property-concepts’ such as dimensions, physical properties, colors, speed, age, value, ‘human propensities’ (‘friendly’, ‘hungry’, ‘ambitious’, etc.) and similar domains. To this can probably added various shades of ‘internally conditioned change-of-state’ semantics (‘in bloom’, ‘rotten’ etc.).
> [...]
> Since the relevant roots are ‘state-oriented’, they do not have any overt ties to particular parts of speech at the deepest recoverable level; the root *h₁rewdʰ- may be aptly glossed either as ‘red’, ‘be red’ or ‘redness’.


The Slavic root noun that gave Ru. _го́род_ "town", _огоро́д_ "vegetable garden" and _и́згородь_ "fence" finds a close parallel in Latin _hortus_ "enclosed garden", AGrk._ χόρτος_ "place where animals feed" and English _yard,_ though the t/d doesn't match, so originally it's one root with two different suffixes. The Slavic one may be suffixed with _*dʰeh₁-_"to put, do", so "to put up an enclosure, make fenced/fortified?". The others look like straightforward t-participles. It doesn't look like this root belonged to the Caland System, mind you.


----------



## ThomasK

I had a quick look, and yet, might be very interesting indeed!!! Thanks a lot!


----------



## djara

In Arabic, one of the words for garden is حديقة, ḥadīqa, from root حدق, ḥadaqa, to surround, to enclose.


----------



## ThomasK

djara said:


> In Arabic, one of the words for garden is حديقة, ḥadīqa, from root حدق, ḥadaqa, to surround, to enclose.


Just one small question: is the average speaker still aware of the root link? Is the _hadaqa  _root still present in related words? And/ or: is the association with some kind of circularity still alive? Wordhippo tells me _hadiqa _can refer to a zoo, to a garden, and alcove, which seems less predictable...


----------



## djara

ThomasK said:


> is the average speaker still aware of the root link?


Probably not.


ThomasK said:


> Is the _hadaqa _root still present in related words?


Yes, in set phrases such as تحدق به المخاطر, tuhdiqu bihi al-makhatir, surrounded by dangers
The verb حدّق, haddaqa, means to stare or to gaze, probably because when you do so, you open your eyes widely (see next answer).


ThomasK said:


> And/ or: is the association with some kind of circularity still alive?


Yes, حدقة, hadaqa(t), is still today the name of the pupil of the eye

With regard to zoo, the full name is حديقة الحيوانات, hadiqat al hayawanat, a translation of 'zoological garden'
I have no idea how حديقة could mean 'alcove'


----------



## ThomasK

djara said:


> I have no idea how حديقة could mean 'alcove'


Well, as a vaulted chamber, one might regard the vault as part of the enclosure, perhaps...


----------

