In the vast lexicon of the English language, where a significant portion of words are borrowed from other languages, “woman” stands out as a rare native term. Its roots can be traced back to Old English, where it was formed by combining wif (woman) and man (person), often spelled as wifman (literally “female person”).
Wif is the precursor to the word “wife.” That original meaning lingers in several contemporary English words, such as “housewife,” “midwife” (originally meaning “woman who is with the mother,” where “mid” is related to the German mit, meaning “with”) and “old wives’ tale” (originally referring to “stories told by old women”). Those terms are linguistic fossils preserving the Old English wif.
The “man” in “woman” originally meant “person,” applicable to both genders, but over time, it narrowed to mean “male person” and broadened to signify “humanity” or “all people.”
Given that Old English already had wif to denote “woman,” why was the seemingly redundant and illogical term wifman coined? Historical texts suggest that wifman originally referred to a “lady’s maid” or “servant.” Over time, wif became “wife,” and wifman turned into “woman.” That historical context imbues the term “woman” with a connotation of “ordinary,” while the “noble” woman is denoted as “lady,” which can be translated as “gentlewoman” or “madam.”
The distinction between “woman” and “lady” has long carried class implications, as evidenced by a sentence from the British literary and scientific journal The Athenaeum: “Defendant pleaded that the person described as a woman was in fact a lady.”
“Lady” carries an aristocratic air, signifying a woman of high birth, status and refinement. In Old English, it meant “bread kneader,” a role symbolizing female power and status in ancient times. Today, the capitalized “Lady” remains a title in British nobility, paired with “Lord.”
The evolution of “woman” from wifman led to some misconceptions. Some interpreted wifman as “wife-man,” implying that a woman’s value is tied to her husband and that a woman’s life is incomplete without a man. Others have speculated that “woman” derives from “womb-man,” equating womanhood solely with childbearing and reproduction. Those misconceptions have largely been dismissed, but the “man” in “woman” still causes confusion. It is essential to remember that in this context, “man” originally meant “person.”
To avoid the gendered implications of “-man,” feminists coined womyn in 1975, aiming to sever the linguistic tie to males. However, that neologism faced criticism within gender studies circles for being unnecessary, confusing and inadvertently exclusionary.
Reflecting contemporary trends, the Oxford English Dictionary included womxn in its March 2021 update, pronounced like “woman” in the singular and “women” in the plural. That term aims to avoid the embedded “man” and use “x” to signify inclusivity. However, womxn has been criticized as unnecessary and, paradoxically, exclusionary.
The original meaning of “woman” is “female person,” with wo- being a variant of “wife” (the modern sense of “wife” came later), and man originally meaning “person,” regardless of gender. The rise of gender consciousness and political correctness has inevitably impacted that English term.
Language evolves through trial and error, stumbling forward in its quest for progress. This International Women’s Day, we explore the etymology of “woman,” celebrating the rich history and evolution of a word that represents half of humanity. To all women, we honor your past, present and future.
Hugo Tseng holds a doctorate in linguistics, and is a lexicographer and former chair of the Soochow University English Department.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS