# Post vs Retro



## Gadyc

Hi alls,

I try to understand what is the exact difference between the two prefixes POST and RETRO

Basically I got:
POST = before
RETRO = towards the back

I am not sure it is exact.

1. Etymologically in latin
2. in current usage (Eng. and other modern languages)

thanks,
Gadyc


----------



## tarinoidenkertoja

Well, about the usage , in italian and english  POST (as in POST-communist..) defines a consequent period, so a succession in time.
RETRO means back,back in time or back/behind spacially (as in "retroattivo" or "retrogrado" (in english "retroactive " and "reactionary).
In latin POST was a preposition (with accusative)  whose meaning was "behind something"(spacially) and after (chronologically), hence the adverb "POST" and "POSTEA" (afterwards)
RETRO was an adverb meaning back,behind or simply backwards.


----------



## Gadyc

Thank you. 
I will try to clarify my question.
it is about anatomical terms. 
For the sides of the body we have anterior and POSTerior.
But, we have devices with diferent angle for ante-version or RETRO-version for forward and backward angles , as well as varus or valgus versions for lateral angles.

I wonder why one is posterior and the other retroversion.


----------



## Ben Jamin

tarinoidenkertoja said:


> RETRO means back,back in time or back/behind spacially (as in "retroattivo" or "retrogrado" (in english "retroactive " and "reactionary).


 
I doubt if 'reactionary' is formed with 'retro-' suffix (what happened to the rest of the suffix?). I think 're' is a separate suffix meaning something like 'again', 'counter', 'in return'. Reactionary comes from 're-agere' - to counteract (this is Latin too). 'Re-' and 'retro' may, however, come from a common root.


----------



## Gadyc

I agree with Ben Jamin.

I think that "Re" is also for  for reciprocity. so the reciprocity of the action is re-action.

Gadyc


----------



## Ben Jamin

Gadyc said:


> I agree with Ben Jamin.
> 
> I think that "Re" is also for for reciprocity. so the reciprocity of the action is re-action.
> 
> Gadyc


 I found one more meaning of re-: repetition


----------



## tarinoidenkertoja

Ben Jamin said:


> I doubt if 'reactionary' is formed with 'retro-' suffix (what happened to the rest of the suffix?). I think 're' is a separate suffix meaning something like 'again', 'counter', 'in return'. Reactionary comes from 're-agere' - to counteract (this is Latin too). 'Re-' and 'retro' may, however, come from a common root.



My examples were taken from modern italian , where words like "retroattivo " and "retrogrado" are obviously formed using "retro" as prefix.
I added the english translations just to be clear (though "retroactive" is a good example of how "retro" is used in english).
However I haven't implied nor stated that "reactionary" is a compound with RETRO as prefix.


----------



## Ben Jamin

tarinoidenkertoja said:


> My examples were taken from modern italian , where words like "retroattivo " and "retrogrado" are obviously formed using "retro" as prefix.
> I added the english translations just to be clear (though "retroactive" is a good example of how "retro" is used in english).
> However I haven't implied nor stated that "reactionary" is a compound with RETRO as prefix.


 It was a misunderstanding then.


----------



## Gadyc

Ben Jamin said:


> I found one more meaning of re-: repetition



Of course, Re-petition is the basic usage, isn't it.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Gadyc said:


> Of course, Re-petition is the basic usage, isn't it.


 
 I meant this in a broader sense: recognoscere, recolligere, reparare, etc. Many verbs with re have the meaning of doing something again.
My dictionary gives three basic meanings of the prefix re-:
back
again
against
Which meaning is basic? Have you got any information about that?
I suppose that 'back' was first.


----------

