-ssion vs. -tion
-ssion vs. -tion
Why in words like 'admit'/'commit'/'permit', ending in t, do we spell the noun form 'admission'/'commission'/'permission'? Wouldn't 'admition'/'commition'/'permition' make more sense? I realize they look odd, but isn't that simply because they're different than we're used to? How did this spelling come about? Is it just due to mimicking the word 'mission' (this is my assumption, but I'm wondering if there's a way to know this for sure).
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
I remember learning about this, but don't remember the why. That said, "mission" comes for a Latin verb "mit" (or something close to that) meaning "to send." I think all those word you mentioned use that same Latin root.
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
Thanks for pointing out the origins of "mission". I found the following etymology on Wiktionary:mic0 wrote:I remember learning about this, but don't remember the why. That said, "mission" comes for a Latin verb "mit" (or something close to that) meaning "to send." I think all those word you mentioned use that same Latin root.
Not knowing Latin, I'll assume there is a reason why the verb 'mitto' becomes 'missio' as a noun. The other words I mentioned all end in -mit and clearly come from prefixes attached to the verb 'mitto'.From French mission (“a sending, a mission”), Old French mission (“expense”), from Latin missiō (“a sending, sending away, dispatching, discharging, release, remission, cessation”), from mittō (“to send”).
So, it's a Latin thing--that's a good enough answer to sate my curiosity. If anyone else has anything to say about this, though, I'd be fascinated to learn more.
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
Are you curious about the spelling or the pronunciation or both?Yarjka wrote:Not knowing Latin, I'll assume there is a reason why the verb 'mitto' becomes 'missio' as a noun. The other words I mentioned all end in -mit and clearly come from prefixes attached to the verb 'mitto'.
So, it's a Latin thing--that's a good enough answer to sate my curiosity. If anyone else has anything to say about this, though, I'd be fascinated to learn more.
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
I'd be curious to know if the 'mitto'-->'missio' conversion takes place with any other verbs in Latin, and if there are words derived from those verbs in English (since all I can find are -mit verbs that do take an -ssion ending). ['transit'/'transition', 'edit'/'edition' are examples of verbs that take -tion instead of -ssion, so I assume they come from other verb forms in Latin and this is the reason (looks like 'transire' and 'editio', respectively)]Katya wrote:Are you curious about the spelling or the pronunciation or both?
Anyways, I think the reason is clearly in the Latin endings of the verbs and that satisfies me.
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
I think the interesting thing here is that the "-tion" ending exists, and that it sounds exactly like "-ssion". Anyone know why they sound the same? Why does "ti" make a "sh" sound?
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
It's a sound change called palatalization. "t" is an alveolar consonant, which means that it's pronounced with your tongue on a ridge on the roof of your mouth, a bit behind your teeth. "ee" is a very high vowel, meaning that your tongue is lifted high in your mouth when you pronounce it, near what's called your (hard) palate. Words that end in "-tion" used to be pronounced "-teeon" (roughly), which is why they were spelled that way. However, when you put two sounds together a lot in a language, it's common for one (or both) of the sounds to change to become more like each other. (This makes it easier to pronounce the word, since you're not having to move your mouth and throat around so much.)Architect wrote:I think the interesting thing here is that the "-tion" ending exists, and that it sounds exactly like "-ssion". Anyone know why they sound the same? Why does "ti" make a "sh" sound?
Palatalization is a subtype of two sounds becoming more alike, specifically when a sound changes by moving closer to the palate in the mouth of by having the body of the tongue higher when the sound is pronounced. The "sh" sound is a post-alveolar sound, which means that it's pronounced between alveolar sounds and palatal sounds, so changing "t" to "sh" gets you about halfway to the palate. (Changing "t" into "sh" also changes the type of consonant from a stop to a fricative, and I think that in the case of "sh," it also the body of the tongue higher in the mouth to pronounce it, which would be another form of palatalization. Also note that the pronunciation of the "i" is basically lost—absorbed into the "sh"—and the final pronunciation is roughly "-shun.")
As for why they're spelled differently, my guess is that the sound change happened first in the "-ssion" words and later in the "-tion" words, which is why the latter spelling conforms to the older pronunciation. (Spelling changes slower than pronunciation, so words that aren't spelled according to modern phonetics often reflect an older pronunciation of the word, although not always.)
Russian has a lot of palatalized consonants that English doesn't have. (They have a palatalized "l" and two different "sh" sounds, one of which is more palatalized than the other.)
Re: -ssion vs. -tion
Very interesting. Something I always wondered, now explained