Is "till" short word for "until"? Why does till have two ls when until has only one?
till
Well, it is an irregularity of a language. Exceptions exist in every language. That's why most proficient users of the language are those who don't analyze the language but learn it intuitively. Your above question won't make your a proficient user of the language!
It's not short for "until".
Till is actually the older word, with until having been formed by the addition to it of the prefix un–, meaning “up to.”
Till is actually the older word, with until having been formed by the addition to it of the prefix un–, meaning “up to.”
...In the 18th century the spelling 'till became fashionable, as if till were a shortened form of until. Although 'till is now nonstandard, 'til is sometimes used in this way and is considered acceptable, though it is etymologically incorrect.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/T0214300.html
http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/T0214300.html
I'm not sure if a reanalysis of a word is etymologically incorrect in and of itself. After all, the sequence till -> until -> 'til seems logical enough, even if "till" remained in use the entire time.
I have to disagree with the Guest above... I think it's perfectly fine to want explanations like these. It's not good to *require* explanations... you should still be able to understand grammar without understanding why it is the way it is, because the reasons for things like these are seldom helpful. But having curiosity is not itself a bad thing.
- Kef
I have to disagree with the Guest above... I think it's perfectly fine to want explanations like these. It's not good to *require* explanations... you should still be able to understand grammar without understanding why it is the way it is, because the reasons for things like these are seldom helpful. But having curiosity is not itself a bad thing.
- Kef
<Well, it is an irregularity of a language.>
It's not accidental. Read above.
It's not accidental. Read above.
<But having curiosity is not itself a bad thing. >
Save your curiosity for better things.
Save your curiosity for better things.
<<Why does till have two ls when until has only one?>>
That's because there was a tendency in English to use <ll> for monosyllabic words, but <l> for related polysyllabic words. This pattern can be seen in pairs like <pall, appal>, <still, instil>, <still, distil>, <fill, fulfil>, <thrall, enthral>, <roll, enrol>, <stall, instal>, <null, annul>, and <till, until>. In American English, most of these polysyllabic words were changed from <l> to <ll>, supposedly in order to make the spelling more consistent; but this change has left "annul" and "until" as unreformed relics, and it's rendered the reformed items inconsistent with other polysyllabic words such as "rebel", "dispel", "impel", "compel", "control". I'm American, but I prefer the unreformed spellings with <l>. (In fact, some later American spelling reformers proposed bringing back the <l> spellings, as you can see here http://www.johnreilly.info/trlist.htm in Theodore Roosevelt's spelling proposal.)
That's because there was a tendency in English to use <ll> for monosyllabic words, but <l> for related polysyllabic words. This pattern can be seen in pairs like <pall, appal>, <still, instil>, <still, distil>, <fill, fulfil>, <thrall, enthral>, <roll, enrol>, <stall, instal>, <null, annul>, and <till, until>. In American English, most of these polysyllabic words were changed from <l> to <ll>, supposedly in order to make the spelling more consistent; but this change has left "annul" and "until" as unreformed relics, and it's rendered the reformed items inconsistent with other polysyllabic words such as "rebel", "dispel", "impel", "compel", "control". I'm American, but I prefer the unreformed spellings with <l>. (In fact, some later American spelling reformers proposed bringing back the <l> spellings, as you can see here http://www.johnreilly.info/trlist.htm in Theodore Roosevelt's spelling proposal.)
Yes, you're right. I shouldn't be curious about it. Normally, I keep my curiosity for the works of Freud. How uncharacter of me!
till has more than one meaning:
Verb:
to work by plowing, sowing, and raising crops : cultivate
Noun:
a: a box, drawer, or tray in a receptacle (as a cabinet or chest) used especially for valuables b: a money drawer in a store or bank; also : cash register2 a: the money contained in a till b: a supply of especially ready money
Noun: (less commonly used)
unstratified glacial drift consisting of clay, sand, gravel, and boulders intermingled
Verb:
to work by plowing, sowing, and raising crops : cultivate
Noun:
a: a box, drawer, or tray in a receptacle (as a cabinet or chest) used especially for valuables b: a money drawer in a store or bank; also : cash register2 a: the money contained in a till b: a supply of especially ready money
Noun: (less commonly used)
unstratified glacial drift consisting of clay, sand, gravel, and boulders intermingled
They are totally different words.... If you want to be technical, the word "till" usually means to plow.
<If you want to be technical, the word "till" usually means to plow. >
In which century. I'd think the first meaning that jumps to mind for most speakers is "till" as a synoym of "until", second, for Brits, a cash register, and last "to plow".
In which century. I'd think the first meaning that jumps to mind for most speakers is "till" as a synoym of "until", second, for Brits, a cash register, and last "to plow".
In my mind, "till" first evokes 'working the ground' ('tilling').
Although "till" (prep/conj) appeared first, and is the more correct form from an etymological perspective, I actually now regard it as a shortening of "until" as " 'til ".
It's funny how it's worked itself backwards...
Although "till" (prep/conj) appeared first, and is the more correct form from an etymological perspective, I actually now regard it as a shortening of "until" as " 'til ".
It's funny how it's worked itself backwards...