Re: does Iridia mean Iris
in reply to a message by Sabertooth
It denotes a woman's name, it does not "mean" woman. If it actually meant "woman" we'd get silly meanings such as Gynea "Woman-woman", when the -ia only denotes that this is a woman's name, and not the word for woman. Similarly "daughter" is only implied, it's not an explicit part of the name. The root is Irid-, the peculiarities of the nominative case result in a reduction to Iris.
Replies
I was thinking more along the lines of -ess [Contessa] (which implies woman or wife) or -ine [Geraldine] (which implies wife or daughter).
Irid- is genitive, not nominative. If "woman" is only implied, it still means "of Iris" or "rainbow one," depending on the Iris/iris context.
It is like the difference between Julus & Julius / Julia.
Irid- is genitive, not nominative. If "woman" is only implied, it still means "of Iris" or "rainbow one," depending on the Iris/iris context.
It is like the difference between Julus & Julius / Julia.
This message was edited 9/24/2019, 4:03 AM
You're still missing the point Sabertooth, the genitive may have a d and the nominative an s, but that has no relevance to compounds or suffixed forms. ALL declensions were originally ῑ̓ρῐδ- (and only the nominative and vocative have lost the δ), the nominative was ῑ̓́ρῐδς, reduced later to ῑ̓́ρῐς, so all derivatives are normally ῑ̓́ρῐδ- as well.
Wouldn't the female form be Irida instead of Iridia, anyway?
Since the figure of Iris is already portrayed as female, wouldn't the -a suffix denote an associated human female?
And isn't -a different from -ia, in that the latter denotes a descendant [daughter]?
Since the figure of Iris is already portrayed as female, wouldn't the -a suffix denote an associated human female?
And isn't -a different from -ia, in that the latter denotes a descendant [daughter]?
This message was edited 10/2/2019, 1:39 PM
No, the ia, is used to form personal names and abstract nouns based on nouns and adjectives. It's a convention used to differentiate from saying "(The) rainbow (Iris) is beautiful" from "(the person named) Rainbow (Iridia) is beautiful". In English this is implied by context, capitalization and the presence of the Definitive or indefinite article, in Greek the suffix differentiates between a name and a simple noun.
We are talking about Greek, after all. In Greek, descendants are expressed by the addition of the ending -ides, so the Nereides are the descendents of Nereus, the Tantalides are the descendents of Tantalos, and so on.
Isn't Iris and its derivatives Latinized Greek?
If so, wouldn't its suffixes follow the Latin format?
If so, wouldn't its suffixes follow the Latin format?
No. We have transcribed it to use the Latin alphabet in place of the original Greek one, that's all of Latinisation, the name stays still Greek.