Notes and Queries, Number 26, April 27, 1850 — John Shaqi
Notes and Queries, Number 26, April 27, 1850Various
History
Notes and Queries, Number 26, April 27, 1850
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
_Shrew_ (No. 24. p. 381.).--The word, I apprehend, means sharp. The
mouse, which is not the field-mouse, as Halliwell states, but an animal
of a different order of quadrupeds, has a very sharp snout. Shrewd means
sharp generally. Its bad sense is only incidental. They seem connected
with scratch; screw; shrags, the end of sticks or furze (Halliwell); to
shred (A.-S., screadan, but which must be a secondary form of the verb).
That the shrew-mouse is called in Latin _sorex_, seems to be an
accidental coincidence. That is said to be derived from [Greek: urax].
The French have confounded the two, and give the name _souris_ to the
common mouse, but _not_ to the shrew-mouse.
I protest, for one, against admitting that Broc is derived from _broc_,
persecution, which of course is participle from break. We say "to
badger" for to annoy, to teaze. I suppose two centuries hence will think
the name of the animal is derived from that verb, and not the verb from
it. It means also, in A.-S., _equus vilis_, a horse that is worn out or
"broken down."
C.B.
_Zenobia_ (No. 24. p. 383.).--Zenobia is said to be "gente Judaea," in
Hoffman's _Lexicon Universale_, and Facciolati, ed. Bailey, Appendix,
voc. _Zenobia_.
M.
Oxford.
_Cromwell's Estates_ (No. 24. p. 389.).--There is Woolaston, in
Gloucestershire, four miles from Chepstow, chiefly belonging now to the
Duke of Beaufort.
C.B.
_Vox et præterea Nihil_ (No. 16. p. 247., and No. 24. p. 387.).--This
saying is to be found in Plutarch's _Laconic Apophthegms_ ([Greek:
Apophthegmata Lakonika]), Plutarchi _Opera Moralia_, ed. Dan.
Wyttenbach, vol. i. p. 649.
Philemon Holland has "turned it into English" thus:--
"Another [Laconian] having plucked all the feathers off from a
nightingale, and seeing what a little body it had: 'Surely,'
quoth he, 'thou art all voice, and nothing else.'"--_Plutarch's
Morals_, fol. 1603. p. 470.
W.B.R.
_Law of Horses._--The following is from Oliphant's _Law of Horses, &c._,
p. 75. Will any of your readers kindly tell me whether the view is
correct?
"It is said in _Southerene_ v. _Howe_ (2 Rol. Rep. 5.), _Si home
vend chivall que est lame, null action gist peur ceo, mes_
caveat emptor: _lou jeo vend chivall que ad null oculus la null
action gist; autrement lou il ad un conterfeit faux et_ bright
eye." "If a man sell a horse which is lame, no action lyes for
that, but _caveat emptor_; and when I sell a horse that has _no_
eye, there no action lies; otherwise where he has a counterfeit,
false, and _bright eye_."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account