File under “Witness, Bearing False”: Testify does not mean . . . well, you’ll see.
I swear that the “attested” etymology of the word testify concerning a certain placements of the hands to signal veracity is wrong, and I
32 1 like "Fishcoddle" better—might even sound kinda sorta like Fishkill in the spirit of the nonsense of the name change. Rhymes with “Fishtwaddle,” too, for whatever that’s worth.
do so without covering my groin with my hands. My pants do the job nicely, thank you.
So, what’s all that about? Placement of the hands? Groin? We’re obviously not talking about putting your left hand on the Bible while raising the right to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We’re talking about the etymology that has no truth, no whole truth, and nothing to do with the truth: the claim that testify results from an ancient Roman practice of averring truth when under oath by covering one’s genitals (if you’re a guy, anyway—as testify is obviously related to testes or testicles).
In fact, there is a connection between testes and testify, though sorting through the theories of exactly what that connection is has all the excitement of a courtroom transcription. Let’s jump to the closing arguments and simply point out that the Latin word testis, “witness,” which led directly to the word testify, came before any application of the word to things now testicular. One theory, in fact, is that testis may have been borrowed to describe gonads as figurative witnesses to virility.
The fascinating sidelight to all this is that the word testis ultimately derives from two Indo-European roots, *tre- and *sta-, meaning “three” and “stand” respectively. The idea is that someone who testifies is a third party who can provide a disinterested point of view. The thought that testicles ultimately derives from a root meaning “three” presents an odd bit of biological irony.”