Talk:lo

Etymology

LO is influenced by the Middle English imperative of LOOK[9], as presented in the main Entry; but remotely cognate with Old English LĀ is Breton LAGUD[7] and Cornish LAGAS[7] (eye). This is possibly ultimately from the stock root of light[3] = √*L2GH[3]. 13 October 2015. Not akin to Old Irish lá (“day”), or Old Irish láth (“heat (limited use of)”); nor לילת (as if wrongly from 'not day') [<לḗíל (lēil)]; from separate roots altogether. Andrew (talk) 12 February 2020.

[0] means 'Absolutely not; [1] means 'Exceedingly unlikely'; [2] means 'Very dubious'; [3] means 'Questionable'; [4] means 'Possible'; [5] means 'Probable'; [6] means 'Likely'; [7] means 'Most Likely' or *Unattested; [8] means 'Attested'; [9] means 'Obvious' - only used for close matches within the same language or dialect, at linkable periods.  '2' inserted in root words stands for a laryngeal to represent an 'a' that does not exist. √ means original or earliest root.

Andrew H. Gray 10:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Andrew (talk)

Lo these many years

I use "lo" as a what seems to be a modern vulgar archaism such as we see described here: "used to call attention or to express wonder or surprise"; it does not seem to be an imperative command to look at something when I am saying it whatever the origin of the term is. [1] [2] [3] [4] I am not sure how to define it. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

I also came here to check for an explanation/definition of lo in precisely that same phrase, Lo these many years (or possibly Lo, these many years, with a comma).

Apparently it's a biblical quote/paraphrase. [5]

An interesting exercise is to see how this is translated/rendered in various versions of the bible. At Biblia we can find Lo replaced variously with Look!/Look, Listen!, Behold, and ∅ (i.e. omitted entirely).

I guess that lo is the oldest of those (in the King James version), so it's not entirely convincing that those attempted translations do indeed perfectly represent the intended original meaning: they could equally have come from someone referring to the KJ version and then looking up lo in the dictionary. If any biblical scholars are passing through, it would be even more interesting to know the source text on which the King James version was based — i.e. what the KJ version was trying to convey.

—DIV (203.63.13.39 00:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC))

P.S. Wouldn't it be appropriate to have this important usage as a quotation in the entry?! I may provisionally add it ...in draft form. Please add appropriate bibliographic information.

—DIV (203.63.13.39 00:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC))

I'm no biblical scholar, but I do have good bible software. "Lo" is a translation of Ancient Greek ἰδοὺ (idoù), which is derived from an imperative form of ὁράω (horáō), so it more or less means "look". More often than not, though, it gets translated as "behold" elsewhere. The next part is τοσαῦτα (tosaûta, “so many”) ἔτη (étē, “years”) δουλεύω (douleúō, “I serve as a slave”) σοι (soi, “for you”). The passage in question is the Prodigal Son's exasperated (and jealous) older brother saying to his father: "look, for so many years I've been slaving for you..." as he's complaining about the extravagant special treatment his irresponsible little brother!!! is getting after blowing everything!!!

In other words, "lo" is often more than just a command to literally look: it's asking people to pay attention, or to take what follows seriously. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:36, 8 January 2023 (UTC)