• itsnicodegallo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    27 days ago

    Actuallyyy…

    Goose comes from Old English, where they pluralized [go:s] (think “goes” with a soft S) by adding [iz] (like “ease”).

    When saying [go:siz], it was kinda hard for the mouth to switch the vowels from the [o] to the [i] quickly, so to save themselves the trouble, they’d change the first vowel to make it a little more similar to the second, so [go:siz] became [ge:siz].

    Then, that was too long, so they dropped the [z]. [ge:si] (think “guessy” but the “e” lasts a bit longer than usual).

    Then, that was too long, so they dropped the [i]. [ge:s] (“guess” with that same drawn out “e”).

    📯It’s the Great Vowel Shift!📯 Now, [go:s] and [ge:s] become [gu:s] and [gi:s]. Almost there!

    The vowels become a tad short over time, and now, you have [gus] and [gis] which are written “goose” and “geese”.

    But “MOOSE”? That’s Algonquin. It has nothing to do with all that noise. “But they sound the same and are written the same?!” So? Haven’t you heard? English orthography is a dumpster fire. Nobody knows what they’re doing. Not even the words.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      Two words on completely different paths, probably headed in completely different directions, but then they smashed together and because they sound similar, one could end up inheriting the evolution of the other.

      • itsnicodegallo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        Yup. That phenomenon is called “analogical change”. The opposite happens too though! For example, “person” and “parson”.