Semantical question on english language

[Randolpin]

Being not a native english speaker, I came up a question on the semantics on the english language. This question regards the suffix "less". It troubles me until now and maybe also to those who are new to this english language about the use of the suffix "less" in various words. For example the word "wireless" means no wire. For me as I start learning English and until now, it seems to me that the word "wireless" means less wires.There is still wire but less wire. Not only this but many more examples. Fruitless, helpless,..etc.

 

I want to enlighten this because it could cause misunderstandings to native and non-native english speakers. Thank you..

Edited April 17, 2017 by Randolpin

[Argent]

I think the problem arises because less has two meanings. The one that is probably more common today is equivalent to not as much. However, the alternative meaning is without. It is the second sense in which it is used as a suffix.

 

What makes the problem worse for non-native speakers is that native speakers are generally not even consciously aware of this distinction until it is pointed out. We automatically understand that "less rain" means "not as much rain", whereas 'rainless' would mean, "no rain at all". (Even though "rainless" is not a proper word.) I'm just glad I never had to learn English as a non-native speaker. It must be hell!

[StringJunky]

Being not a native english speaker, I came up a question on the semantics on the english language. This question regards the suffix "less". It troubles me until now and maybe also to those who are new to this english language about the use of the suffix "less" in various words. For example the word "wireless" means no wire. For me as I start learning English and until now, it seems to me that the word "wireless" means less wires.There is still wire but less wire. Not only this but many more examples. Fruitless, helpless,..etc.

 

I want to enlighten this because it could cause misunderstandings to native and non-native english speakers. Thank you..

WRT to the wireless, this device was the transition from the telegraph, which was wired... I think. It's to do with the mode of transmission of a signal via radiowaves and that's why it was called 'wireless'.

Edited April 17, 2017 by StringJunky

[Randolpin]

WRT to the wireless, this device was the transition from the telegraph, which was wired... I think. It's to do with the mode of transmission of a signal via radiowaves and that's why it was called 'wireless'.

There is wire but called wireless? When wireless means no wire.

[goldglow]

Being not a native english speaker, I came up a question on the semantics on the english language. This question regards the suffix "less". It troubles me until now and maybe also to those who are new to this english language about the use of the suffix "less" in various words. For example the word "wireless" means no wire. For me as I start learning English and until now, it seems to me that the word "wireless" means less wires.There is still wire but less wire. Not only this but many more examples. Fruitless, helpless,..etc.

 

I want to enlighten this because it could cause misunderstandings to native and non-native english speakers. Thank you..

You have almost answered your own question. When you see the suffix " less" , think of it as meaning " without " , so " wireless " means " without wires " and " fruitless " means " without fruit " etc. " Less " placed before a word, but separate from the word, means " fewer " or " not as much " or " not as many ", so then it would be right to say " less wires " if you meant "fewer wires " or " less fruit " if you meant " not as much fruit " etc. " Less " as a separate word can also mean " minus " so you can say " 3 less 2 is1 " or " 4 less 2 is 2 " etc.

[Randolpin]

Thank you for that good answer.. Suffix "less" is different from word less. This is I think one of the problem in english language.

[StringJunky]

Thank you for that good answer.. Suffix "less" is different from word less. This is I think one of the problem in english language.

English is a concoction of several languages, so it has several sets of rules, which can conflict. If you know the country of origin, or etymology, of a word, you can often see where the rule or definition comes from.

[DrKrettin]

The suffix -less is cognate with the German suffix -los, gehirnlos, gedankenlos etc, but the German word los means something different. The same in English, but the difficulty with less and -less is that there is a confusing similarity of meanings.

 

As an aside, note that English has a capital E even when an adjective. Thus English language. It is surprising how lazy people get with the shift key, even when there is no excuse.

Edited April 17, 2017 by DrKrettin

[Strange]

There is wire but called wireless? When wireless means no wire.

 

 

There is no wire between the sender and the receiver (the fact there might be wire within each is irrelevant as that is not what changed in the transition from telegraph to radio communication).

 

Also, you can't expect language (any language) to be precise in its formation of words. (As someone said: "there is no logic in etymological".)

[StringJunky]

 

 

... (As someone said: "there is no logic in etymological".)

I like that.

[Randolpin]

I want to know now is that how can we develop english language more adaptive especially to those non-native english speakers provided that we have such issues as what stringjunky pointed already.

[Strange]

I want to know now is that how can we develop english language more adaptive especially to those non-native english speakers provided that we have such issues as what stringjunky pointed already.

 

 

You can't. No one controls how language develops. It is determined by its users.

 

And which English, anyway? There are hundreds (probably thousands) of dialects - they are all different and some of them are mutually incomprehensible!

[Bender]

The suffix -less is cognate with the German suffix -los, gehirnlos, gedankenlos etc, but the German word los means something different. The same in English, but the difficulty with less and -less is that there is a confusing similarity of meanings.

Same in Dutch, but we have -loos as suffix, while "less" translate to "minder" which doesn't cause any confusion.

 

Being used to this kind of suffix, I never even noticed this confusion when learning English. The horrible spelling is much, much worse in my opinion.

[goldglow]

You have almost answered your own question. When you see the suffix " less" , think of it as meaning " without " , so " wireless " means " without wires " and " fruitless " means " without fruit " etc. " Less " placed before a word, but separate from the word, means " fewer " or " not as much " or " not as many ", so then it would be right to say " less wires " if you meant "fewer wires " or " less fruit " if you meant " not as much fruit " etc. " Less " as a separate word can also mean " minus " so you can say " 3 less 2 is1 " or " 4 less 2 is 2 " etc.

I should also say that " fruitless " can also mean " without success ", as in " a fruitless attempt to find gold " when no gold was found; or as in " a fruitless attempt to climb a mountain " when the attempt failed.

[Randolpin]

I should also say that " fruitless " can also mean " without success ", as in " a fruitless attempt to find gold " when no gold was found; or as in " a fruitless attempt to climb a mountain " when the attempt failed.

The issue now is the semantical use of english words and the proper use of meaning.

[Manticore]

Same in Dutch, but we have -loos as suffix, while "less" translate to "minder" which doesn't cause any confusion.

 

Being used to this kind of suffix, I never even noticed this confusion when learning English. The horrible spelling is much, much worse in my opinion.

 

Yes, English spelling is insane.

 

(Sorry if you've heard this before - it's pretty old.)

 

Take the letters 'gh' as pronounced in words like 'rough'.

The letter 'o' as pronounced in 'women'.

And the letters 'ti' as pronounced in words like 'motion'

Put them together to get the word 'ghoti' - pronounced as 'fish'.

[DrKrettin]

And then there was the student trying to learn English who finally gave up when he saw the billboard "My Fair Lady - pronounced success"

[Externet]

 

 

...No one controls how language develops. It is determined by its users...

 

Priceless !

 

But languages do not develop, -nor evolve- Users degenerate them.

[DrP]

That's opinion Externet - every generation is filled with old people moaning about how the young are abusing language and doing things wrong... Language evolves, the world changes and we just have to put up with it.

Edited April 18, 2017 by DrP

[DrKrettin]

Priceless !

 

But languages do not develop, -nor evolve- Users degenerate them.

 

That's also priceless - I hope that the terrible use of "degenerate" as a transitive verb was intentional irony.

[Strange]

But languages do not develop, -nor evolve- Users degenerate them.

 

 

Of course not (otherwise we would have lost the ability to communicate by now). Users improve language constantly by adjusting it to fit to their needs.