14. THE CHILDREN OF P-OSTE-UM

(Part of a series based upon Stiles, The Anatomy of Medical Terminology (Radix Antiqua 2015; ISBN 978-1-988941-240)

THE CHILDREN OF P-OSTE-UM

            Near the end of the "parent" Post we were looking at considerations arising from the concept of synonymity.  Synonyms will be explored more fully in another post, but for now it may be observed that apparently synonymous forms sometimes result in divergent meanings.  This can be observed in one of the synonym groups derived from P-OSTE-UM, the one in which P- denotes one of the three synonymous prefixes translated as "outside."

            Specifically, while the indirect evidence for the existence of the real words *EX-oste-um and *ECT-oste-um ("the part OUTSIDE a bone") is that both EX-ost-osis and ECT-oste-al are attested (as discussed previously), the following word shows a divergent meaning:

            ECT-ost-osis                 <defined in "the dictionary" as if

                                                = *ect-ostE-OST-osis>

            *ect-ostE-OST-osis      the ossification of

                                                something outside a bone

                                                = the *ECT-ostE-um

            Although we thus still postulate the synonymous noun we first derived from ECT-oste-al, the confusion arising here, from the (mistakenly) perceived synonymity between oste- (with osse-, as well as oss-), on the one hand, and -ost-, on the other, is the error pointed out way back in Post 2: because the dependable meaning of words of the form

            X-OST-osis       is          the ossification of X

                        (See The Anatomy of Medical Terminology, Chapter 3, numbers 2-3),

this rule or formula would traditionally have pre-empted the use of -ost- (especially in the sequence X-ost-osis) as a synonym for the other forms.

            But an even more convoluted situation arises in the (already inherently more convoluted) case of our indirectly attested word *SYN-oste-um.  As I hinted previously, some mental gymnastics are required just to get from the meanings implied by our word-parts to the dictionary definition "joint."  To do this, we need to go back a few steps and try to rewrite the "basic definition" of P-oste-um, keeping in mind our starting premises, but being willing to "torture" the English a bit:

            P-oste-um                    "a P-bone thing"

                                                = the part located in relation to a bone

                                                in the way indicated by P-

 For example:

            end-oste-um               "an INSIDE-the-bone thing"

                                                = the part INSIDE a bone

            peri-oste-um              "a surrounding-the-bone thing"

                                                = the part SURROUNDING a bone

            *ECT-oste-um              "an OUTSIDE-the-bone thing"

                                                = the part OUTSIDE a bone

This logic, applied to our word, suggests the following sequence:

            *SYN-oste-um             "a WITH-the-bone thing"

                                                (or, admittedly by a leap)

                                                "a TOGETHER-bones thing"

                                                = "a bones-TOGETHER-thing"

                                                = a joint

            Two points arise.  First, uses and abuses of the prefix syn- are one small example of some problematically-coined word-sets in medical terminology (future posts!), but "strained" "conceptual leaps" like the ones we are forced to make here are unfortunately fairly frequently necessary in contemporary Latglish.  Second, the dictionary definition "joint" for syn-oste- is probably an oversimplification: given that the usual combining form for that body-part is arthr-,  

it is likely that the term syn-oste- was originally designed to focus upon the actual, or specific, "bone-joining" which forms what is called, more generally, a "joint."

            Be that as it may, our torturous interpretation here seems to be right, as it allows us to make an effective analysis that works for both the following well-attested words:

            SYN-oste-otomy          "the cutting of a joint"

                                                = "the cutting of a bones-TOGETHER-thing"

            SYN-oste-ology            "the study of joints"

                                                = "the study of bones-TOGETHER-things."

            But the difficulty--the "convolutions"--is surely partly responsible for the fact that another set of attested words seems to point directly to X-ost-osis instead.  Here is the evidence:

            syn-ostE-osis                [see] syn-ost-osis

            syn-ostE-otic                [see] syn-ost-otic

            syn-ost-otic                  pertaining to syn-ost-osis

            syn-ost-osis                  "the fusing of bones"

Thus this definition--the dictionary one--seems to be at least "contaminated" by the concept of "ossification," if not outright derived somehow or other from

            x-ost-osis                     the ossification of x,

rather than from our hypothetical *syn-oste-um!  To put this differently, syn-ost-osis (with its dictionary definition) perhaps represents a cluster of ideas looking for a P-oste-um to hold it together--to realize it--perhaps a word like

            *syn-oste-ost-osis      the ossification of

                                                "a bones-together thing"

We might be reminded here that our speculations about the parallel case of ect-ost-osis at the beginning of this Post led us to a hypothetical

            *ect-oste-ost-osis      the ossification of

                                                something outside a bone

Perhaps the real truth is that there does exist yet another "template" or word pattern, namely

            *P-oste-ost-osis         the ossification of

                                                P-oste-um

                                                            = something located in the relation to a bone

                                                            specified by P-

--a "template" which is consistently misunderstood by its users, resulting in the anomalous forms P-ost-osis.

            But it would be very difficult to be certain about this; sadly, more and more such ill-formed words are appearing in the vocabulary, of the kind that we were calling "invalid" back in the "Fighting Words" Post.

            This particular source of confusion is perhaps worsened by what may be an overall  tendency to simplify things, manifested here by a trend towards replacing -ostE- by the shorter -ost-.  If so, like many simplifications, this one rests upon an error which is bound to result in needless confusions.

            Examination of our largest set of attested words of the form P-oste-Z (where -Z stands for any ending at all, and where none of the words show "contamination" by the concept of "ossification") shows that -oste- is still the "preferred form" (the one to which any alternate is cross-referenced), in all but two words.  Here are all of the main-entry words in questions, with (as usual) the translations we would expect our students to present:

            peri-oste-al                 surrounding a bone

                                                <students might also have--equally plausibly--generated

                                                pertaining to

                                                something surrounding a bone>

            peri-oste-oma             a tumor involving

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-oste-edema         the swelling of

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-osteo-medull-itis the inflammation of the marrow and

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-osteo-myel-itis    the inflammation of the marrow and

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-osteo-phyte         a growth on

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-oste-otomy          the cutting of

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-oste-otome          an instrument for cutting

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-oste-ous               pertaining to

                                                something surrounding a bone

                                                <students might also have--equally plausibly--generated

                                                surrounding a bone>

In four of these cases, an alleged synonym in peri-ost- is cross-referenced to the -ostE- form; but the two words which are cross-referenced the other way are the following (with the defined main entries included, for completeness):

            peri-ostE-itis                [see] peri-ost-itis

            peri-ostE-osis              [see] peri-ost-osis

            peri-ost-itis                  the inflammation of

                                                something surrounding a bone

            peri-ost-osis                an abnormal condition involving

                                                something surrounding a bone

            The implication will be clear to anyone who has spent too much time inside a medical dictionary: the two most frequently occurring diagnoses in all of medicine (at least as revealed by the dictionary) are those named X-osis and X-itis.  The fact that in our group, it is the "frequent flyer" words peri-ost-ITIS and peri-ost-OSIS that are edging out the older, "more correct" forms in -ostE- seems to confirm that the erroneous--and therefore alarming--trend I speculated about above is for real.

            On that note, two more dictionary entries associated with the word periosteum are worth pointing out, with commentary:

            peri-ost-oste-itis          [see] osteo-peri-ost-itis

            osteo-peri-ost-itis        <defined in the dictionary as if the word were

                                                *peri-ostE-ostE-itis>

            *peri-ostE-ostE-itis      the inflammation of a bone and

                                                something surrounding a bone

The second entry bears the additional note "also called periosteitis."  Now this is all a bit confusing.  Were the coiners shooting for something analogous to a version of the hypothetical template postulated above, namely a *peri-OSTE-ost-itis modelled upon our *P-oste-ost-osis?  If so, they missed pretty badly, not only putting the word-parts in not just one but two different wrong orders, but also getting the translation completely wrong!--

            *peri-oste-ost-itis        the inflammation of something involving

                                                the ossification of

                                                something surrounding a bone

Finally, meditate upon the future as perhaps indicated by this--

            peri-ost                        [see] peri-oste-um

                                                                        - o -