Sulphur vs Sulfur-Beware of Pseudo-Greeks bearing "phe's"

[Kevin Vang <>]

Dear Group

A most intriguing discussion. When I am not running around manically birdwatching or working with AFAP, one of Australia’s main overseas aid and development agencies (www.afap.org), I am slaving away on yet another MA in ancient languages this time Babylonian Cuneiform.   In pursuit of the wisdom of the ancients, I have worked for many years in Latin, Greek, Hittite, Sumerian and Hieroglyphics etc.  So I can shed a bit of light on this sul(f)(ph)uric issue which involves Greek-Latin origins.

The Spelling Society (yes there is one) sums it up nicely as the follows:

The principle on which English spelling is often said to be based, and which is often claimed as its justification, is that of etymology: English spellings are as they are, it is asserted, because they show the derivation of words from Old English, or French, or Latin, or Greek, or wherever else. Yet when one examines in detail the history of many spellings through the centuries, one finds that the pure principle of etymology has been widely corrupted. Examples arising in comparisons between British and American spellings include anomalous British defence, etc (cited in §4 above) and two British preferences based on errors introduced in Latin: foetus was a Latin respelling of fetus (perhaps by analogy with foedus, but in fact related to fecundity, felicity, feminine, as well as effete); and sulphur was a Latin respelling with pseudo-Greek PH of original Latin sulfur. Thus American defense, fetus, sulfur are etymologically more correct, as well as simpler, than British defence, foetus, sulphur.

The full text of this article can be found at http://www.spellingsociety.org/journals/j21/usforuk.html

Therefore, while I applaud your fortitude Robert in raising the issue and hope your health withstood the onslaught, I am afraid that the above article is correct and etymologically “sulfur” is indeed the more correct and less pretentious.   The Romans went through a classical phase during the time of Augustus when everything Greek became in vogue and the aesthetes of the day began affecting the normal Latin spelling with “Greekisms” or as the article above notes “pseudo-Greek”.  Greek has a Cyrillic “f” letter which when transliterated by the Romans turned into a “ph” or letter “phe” instead of the regular “f”.  Why this occurred is not well understood, although it may have been related to either nuances in pronunciation or just over zealous academics who like making hairline distinctions.  So Carl (whose SWQ/NWNSW desert reports are excellent by the way) can now rest easier at night knowing that all the time, he was  defending the common man of Rome against the pretence of those fluffy-headed, pretentious Greek-o-phyles (the Euro Cup 2004 not withstanding).

Anyway, if we are going to be purists, we probably need to return to the original ‘sulfur’ or even its supposed Sanskrit origin before that with is commonly transliterated as “sulver”.

Another thing that birders may be interested in noting is that there are no less than 260 bird hieroglyphs in Classic Middle and New Kingdom Egyptian covering over 50 key wild bird species.  Birds have played a major role in language since its inception.  Furthermore, ancient cuneiform resembles small bird tracks and with the difficulty of most of the clay tablets that I am currently trying to translate, they may have well have been written by birds with their feet, playing in the wet clay ;-)

I soon will be posting some of these ancient translations in the “history links” section of my birdwatching database (www.birdquest.net).  So you can see the bird hieroglyphs in action.

Kevin Vang