Re: New issue of JVP 2001(2) (no JOKE)

[NJPharris@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/12/01 9:54:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
qilongia@yahoo.com writes:


>   *Oviraptor* = snatcher of eggs
>   *Conchoraptor* = snatcher of shells
>   *Velociraptor* = snatcher of swift[ness]
>   *Utahraptor* = snatcher of [a/the] Utah [as if there was an
> object called a Utah that could be grasped between the limbs]
>   *Bambiraptor* = snatcher of Bambi [not _ever_ in reference to
> the Disney character, or the Italian word "bambino", but as a
> nickname for the specimen]
>   *Rapator* [probably? a "revision" of _raptor_] = snatcher?
>   *Eoraptor* = snatcher of the dawn
>   *Variraptor* = snather of [a/the] Var [same as Utahraptor]
>   *Pyroraptor* = snatcher of fir
e

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with Jaime on this one.  Yes, the
first part of a compound containing a deverbal (word derived from a verbal
root) is often construed as the object of the verb, but this is not always so.

Think of a phrase like "Boston strangler".  The entity referred to here is
not one who strangles Boston, but to someone who strangles [someone or
something] who also happens to be associated with Boston.

To the best of my knowledge, compounds of this sort are/were also possible in
Latin and Ancient Greek.  This is the sort of model on which *Velociraptor*,
*Utahraptor*, *Bambiraptor*, etc., are formed.

--Nick P.