{"id":1744,"date":"2018-07-01T17:51:52","date_gmt":"2018-07-01T17:51:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmjebmspotlight\/?p=1744"},"modified":"2018-07-01T17:51:52","modified_gmt":"2018-07-01T17:51:52","slug":"a-word-about-evidence-7-data-etymology-and-grammar","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmjebmspotlight\/2018\/07\/01\/a-word-about-evidence-7-data-etymology-and-grammar\/","title":{"rendered":"A Word About Evidence: 7. Data\u2014etymology and grammar"},"content":{"rendered":"

 <\/p>\n

In the first of two blogs, Jeff Aronson considers the etymology of the word \u201cdata\u201d and grammatical aspects of its usages, with the intention of discussing who owns data and collections of data.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/a>I was recently verbally accosted (the word is not too strong) by a professor of computing science who demanded to know whether the word \u201cdata\u201d is singular or plural. When I suggested the latter he asserted otherwise so aggressively that contradiction seemed unwise.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here I examine the question using etymology, grammar, and usage as my tools. I shall then examine the more important question of who owns data.<\/span><\/p>\n

Etymology<\/b><\/p>\n

When investigating the origins of words one is often led back to what one might call the mother tongues, a range of proto-languages, such as Proto-IndoEuropean and Proto-Semitic. These languages are themselves not known from records but have been deduced from the patterns of languages that <\/span>are<\/span><\/i> known, tracing them back to the hypothesized originals. English words can most often be traced back to Proto-IndoEuropean roots.<\/span><\/p>\n

To understand how this happens, consider the IndoEuropean root DHE, the so-called e-grade form of the root, meaning to set or put down, to make or shape. Because<\/span> vowels change readily<\/span><\/a> when words develop, the e-grade form can become an o-grade form, DHO, or a zero-grade form, DH\u018f, in which the final vowel is replaced by a neutral vowel sound called a schwa, after the Hebrew vowel of that name. The schwa, represented by an inverted e (\u0259 or \u018f) typically occurs in weakly stressed syllables, like the final <\/span>a<\/span><\/i> in \u201cdata\u201d (\/\u02c8d\u0251\u02d0t\u0259\/). These various forms can also have prefixes and suffixes and may be doubled (technically known as reduplication), giving rise to a<\/span> myriad of words<\/span><\/a> from a single root. DHE, for example, gives deed and misdeed, DHO gives do, doing, and done, DHEM gives deem and theme, and DHOM gives doom and words ending -dom, like kingdom and leechdom; there are many more.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now take the IndoEuropean o-grade root DO and its zero-grade form D\u018f, which means to give. In Sanskrit this gave rise to dad\u0101mi and in Greek \u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bc\u03b9, both meaning I give. Note the reduplication of the root in both cases. This typically happens in verbs when the action is repeated\u2014giving is supposed to be habitual. The Latin verb to give is d\u0101r\u0113 (in which both vowels are pronounced separately, as marked), which also reduplicates in the perfect tense as dedi, mimicking the repetition of a past action.<\/span><\/p>\n

The past participle of the Latin verb dare is datum, meaning \u201cgiven\u201d, which then becomes a noun of neuter gender, meaning something that is given or is due to be given\u2014a present, a debit, or a debt. The plural of \u201cdatum\u201d is \u201cdata\u201d. And that should be the end of it.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, one should not be seduced by the etymology of a word (the etymological fallacy)\u2014what it once meant does not necessarily tell you what it means now. English is not Latin and words mature with time. Consider, as an example, \u201cagenda\u201d. The Latin verb agere means to do, and its gerund, agendum, means something that needs to be or must be done. So agenda, the plural form, means things that need to be done. When the word was first used in English it implied a list of things to be done, a list of agenda, but with time the list of plural things just became a list called the agenda. Nowadays it can also mean a plan of some kind (as in a hidden agenda). Similarly, \u201cstamina\u201d, now a singular noun, arose from the plural of \u201cstamen\u201d, the thread of life spun by the Fates; the longer the thread the more stamina you had.<\/span><\/p>\n

These analogies give insights into the problem, which depends on the<\/span> difference between count nouns and non-count nouns<\/span><\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n