Language Of Confusion: To Be Or Not To Be

It’s the last etymology post of the year! Might as well do something that’s been a long time coming: be, one of the most common used verbs in English. I’m betting a lot of ESL learners are annoyed at it considering how irregular it is. Most of be’s forms don’t even look like the same word.
 
Be comes from the Old English beon, to be or become, from the Proto Germanic biju-. That’s from the Proto Indo European root bheue-, to be, exist, or grow, which is one of those things that’s part of a bunch of other words I won’t be getting into because we’ll be here all day and I’ve got things to do.
 
However, probably the only be word that’s from bheue- is been. The others are all different! Am was eom in Old English, and it was the first person version of be like it is today. It’s from the Proto Germanic ism(i)-, from the Proto Indo European esmi-, which is from the root es-, to be. Yes, they had two versions of to be. It’s also a part of a bunch of different words, the most obvious of which is is. Is is from the Old English is, big surprise, just is. That’s from the Germanic es-, from the Proto Indo European es-ti-, so a slightly different version of es-.
 
Now, for was. Man, is this one a trip. It showed up in Old English as wesan or waes, all of which are from the Proto Germanic wesanan. That one is from the Proto Indo European root wes-, which means to remain, abide, or well. So was isn’t even from a word that means to be. Were is from the same origin, having shown up as the Old English waeron, another tense of wesan/waes. There’s no real explanation as to why this word morphed into being the past tense of to be. It just did for some reason.
 
Words, man. Words.
 
Sources
Online Etymology Dictionary
University of Texas at Austin Linguistic Research Center
University of Texas at San Antonio’s page on Proto Indo European language
Tony Jebson’s page on the Origins of Old English
Old English-English Dictionary

Language of Confusion: To Be or Not to Be

Not just “be”, really, since be has so many forms that do not seem connected to the root word. I mean, am? Are? Were and was? What the hell are those?!

I don’t have a time for when be showed up, but I’m sure it’s because it’s always the first to appear in a “new” language. In Old English, be is beon, beom, or bion, meaning be, exist, become, or happen. It comes from the Proto Germanic biju, “I am, I will be”, and can be traced to the Proto Indo European bheue, be, exist, or grow.

Is, the most common word for those of us who write in present tense, comes from the Old English is and can be traced to the Proto Indo European es, to be. This word is still apart of many languages, from the German ist to the French est to the Latin esse. It can also be found in English words like essence. So originally, it was another word for be, or bheue, and now they’re both the same word.

Was comes from the Old English wesan, waes, and waeron (the origin word for the plural were), which are actually forms of the word wesan, to remain. Wesan comes from the Proto Germanic wesanan and the Proto Indo European wes, remain or dwell. Although it used to be its own word, sometime between Proto Germanic and Old English it turned into the past tense of be.

Am comes from the Old English eom, to be or remain, and Proto Indo European esmi. Back in Old English, it only appeared in the present tense and until the thirteenth century meant something like “come to be” while existence was expressed with wes up there. There’s also are, which was earun/aron in Old English and probably came from the Proto Germanic ar, a possible variant of es. I guess people started combining the various definitions of be until they found forms that worked.

You can bet I’ll be doing more of these so-called simple words.

Sources

Online Etymology Dictionary

Tony Jebson’s page on the Origins of Old English

University of Texas at Arlington’s History and Development of the English Language

University of Texas at San Antonio’s page on Proto Indo European language