3 ms·
I say this to justify a theory. Hence I focus on the theory and not to discredit another theory as a strawman. But I noted that I would if called on, so here go
by posterboy 8y ago
I say this to justify a theory. Hence I focus on the theory and not to discredit another theory as a strawman. But I noted that I would if called on, so here goes:
* We know that anciently transmitted etymologies are unreliable. They were prone to folk etymology as much as we are, if not more so.
* I guess the most prolific onomatopoeia are simply way way older than this word. And they proliferate because a cuckoo really doesn't make any other sound than that. Whereas language is a lot more diverse. It might have frequent recognizable features, even ones sounding like "bar", I don't even doubt that. After all we have them too, argh. I can imagine that it is a word pronounced in allusion to the foreign language, even a foreign word.
* I also hear the theory that some sound imitations pop up all over the place, independently. At least that is obviously highly unlikely to have happened here.
* There is very little chance to actually experience a foreigner, which would be needed to reinforce the perception as sound imitation. So it's more likely this was told as a joke for reference. That invites the thought that the joke was just that and outweighed the etymon. Most people don't really care about etymology anyway.
* Ideophone fits the idea much better.
* It's childish; foreign policy is not.
- Grustaf 8y ago> I say this to justify a theory. Well then your theory is wrong, there are numerous onomatopoetic words that have suffixes etc. Why wouldn't they? No matter what you think about this specific word. I didn't really understand the rest of what you wrote. >There is very little chance to actually experience a foreigner Would this be referring to foreigners in Ancient Greece? Then it's just factually incorrect.