If relinquish is a word, why isn’t linquish? It sounds like ‘re’ is being used as a prefix to me… Maybe linquish had an archaic meaning that has just been lost.
Then again, it sounds like the ‘pre’ in prefix is a prefix too, so maybe my logic is getting a bit circular.
5 comments
linquish
to hand something over to somebody without giving up emotional attachment to the object
He turned over the chairmanship but continued to give counsel–unwanted counsel. He had relinquished the post then immediately linquished it right back.
Prefix is ok too as for example, prefix, postfix or just fix!
That’s the Inquish language for you – preposterous.
Here’s me trying to sound smart and spoil everyone’s fun:
Re-, of course is the prefix meaning again;
linquere is Latin for leave; and
ish is an extension of the verb stem.
That’s right, verbs have stems.
So surely, by Julian’s logic, linquish should still be a word for the first time you give something up, and relinquish should only be used if you give it up again?
Maybe its a neglected positive. The positive form of a word that is so uncommon no one remembers it anymore, like ‘sufferable’ from ‘insufferable’. Or it could be a false neglected positive, which is a word which sounds like it should exist, but doesn’t, or means the opposite. Like ‘gruntle’ from ‘disgruntle’, or ‘pugn’ from ‘impugn’. Or ‘criminate’, from ‘incriminate’, which seems like it should mean to prove someone innocent, but really means the same as ‘incriminate’.