Re: ficken

From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 51765
Date: 2008-01-22

Because of the vocalic poverty of PIE, many terms of quite disparate meaning became, for all intents, identical in form, which lead to associations by form even when the semantics were completely unrelated.
An occasional word of a 'kiss' is English is 'peck', e.g.
I would, however, be rather amazed if any root meaning 'kiss' could develop into meaning 'fuck'. It simply does not make sense semantically, IMHO.
The hidden premise here is, I think, that oral to genital contact is suggested. I firmly believe that until indoor plumbing and civilized hygiene, genital to genital contact was almost exclusively the rule.
Even male homosexual activity was probably almost exclusively anal to genital contact.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 5:59 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: ficken

--- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> No, it's you who is enforcing things. Show me one language in which a
> verb referring to copulation evolved semantically into 'kiss'. The
> opposite (i.e. the euphemistic use of "innocent" vocabulary) is
> commonplace -- see below.
> Piotr


"Kissing, as an expression of affection or love, is unknown among many
races, and in the history of mankind seems to be a late substitute for
the more primitive rubbing of noses, sniffing, and licking." [Buck,

I quotes this from the discussion on the etymology of English kiss
but is quite the same discussion
(please see it at http://www.etymonli php?term= kiss)

So this *puk^- (from originally 'to punch, to sting' etc...) has
described, initially, different contacts with sexual connotations ...
maybe also (why not?) all of them, in one term.

I think that this was the original meaning of 'the sexual connotations'
of *puk^-

This means also that the contacts, at that time, (including what we
could consider today as 'kisses') weren't quite 'pure soft contacts'

From there, I don't see any issue that puk^- became in time either 'to
fuck' or 'to kiss'