Real Spellers

English Makes Sense!

Important News!

Have you been wishing for access to the ultimate Orthographic resource?

The RealSpellers™ Toolbox is moving online!
Check it out.

I was lucky enough to visit a Grade 2 class today in which a noted Egyptologist video conferenced with the students to share is knowledge of ancient Egypt. It was just fascinating. 

During the session the words <Egyptologist> and <dynasties> came up and I knew I had some rich words to investigate. Go to THIS LINK for a pdf (screen shot below) with analysis of words related to both of these words. Also, on that pdf is a link to a video from Real Spelling on the "Orthography of Dynamic" which has always been a favourite of mine for going through the process of morphological analysis. 

Go check it out!

Screen Shot 2016 02 29 at 10.40.28 PM


Comments (2)

This comment was minimized by the moderator on the site

It is a great question Lisa!
I'm quite confident in identifying twin bases in Latin. I know a fair bit of how to analyze Latin structure, and identify if we have evidence of a twin. I'm better at Latin verbs than anything else. So I know that <scribe> and <script> are twins.
When I go to Etymonline and find the Latin root scribere can go to LatDict to find the four principle parts of this verb:

scribo, scribere, scripsi, scriptus

And then I show the infinitive suffix in the second part this way scib(ere) and analyze the supine suffix in the fourth part this way script(us).

When I see that the spelling of what is left is not the same, I have evidence for my twin base in English <scribe> / <script>. I know that there is a final <e> in <scribe> of course from the word <scribe> itself.

But just being in this etymological family does not make a twin. The fact that the word word <scribble> goes back to this same root does not mean we have a triplet!

So the fact that <dyne> and <dynam> share a Greek root is not enough information to conclude we have a twin. I need to learn more about Greek structure before I will be able to come to that kind of conclusion. Perhaps others out there can help us with this process. Until then, though, I'm very happy to say that these bases are in the same etymological family. I don't have the need to go deeper than than yet. One day I'll learn how to -- maybe your question will be the spark for me to finally gain control of that understanding!

Peter Bowers
This comment was minimized by the moderator on the site

So these are twin bases: <dyne> and <dynam>

and so are these: <log> and <logue>, right?

Lisa Barnett
There are no comments posted here yet