Etymology (originally Re: C Bites (really, how to spell ))

[andrew at stc.UUCP]

In article <2600022 at ccvaxa> preece at ccvaxa.UUCP (scott preece) writes:
>
>> /* Written 10:22 pm  Oct 12, 1985 by gwyn at BRL.ARPA in ccvaxa:net.lang.c
>> spelled x => ks sound as in "example" => ek sample
>> spelled ct => kt sound as in "enacted" => enak ted
>> 
>----------
>Ah, but the spelling 'connexion' is your average dictionary as a
>variant spelling of connection, which has pretty much the same sound
>as function, so it's not that far off.  For all I know 'funxion'
>may be a recognized spelling in Britain (where 'connexion' is
>more common than in the US).

Gentlemen, it's really very simple, the use of `x' in English derives
directly from the etymology of the word:

connexion derives from latin: con- and nectere, nexum to tie.

Since this x in the gerund is rather rare, English has very few such
words spelt with an x, whereas American tends to use x's frequently
since it reduces the amount one has to write :-)
( hence `sox' == half-hosen, socks)

Function on the other hand derives via Old French from Latin
- functio, -onis, fungi, functus to perform
no `x' as you will see.

{Derivations from Chambers Etymological English Dictionary, New edition (1967)}
-- 
Regards,
	Andrew Macpherson.	<andrew at stc.UUCP>
	{aivru,creed,datlog,iclbra,iclkid,idec,inset,root44,stl,ukc}!stc!andrew