German word for war - Word и Excel - помощь в работе с программами

level 1

· 1 yr. ago

🇳🇱 N | 🇺🇸 C1 | 🇫🇷 B2 | 🇸🇪 A0

Dutch oorlog is related to Icelandic örlög = destiny

level 2

Old English too <orlæǵ> ‘fate’

level 2

Interestingly apparently it is a merger of this word meaning destiny and the word in the description on the image which apparently already meant war in proto-Germanic.

We also still got ‘krijg’ which although pretty old-fashioned used on itself is pretty common in a range of derivations and compound words, strijd (battle), and war (mess/tangle)/verwarring (confusion) which funnily went through Frankish to Romance languages and ultimately came to English in a still recognizable form.

level 2

I wonder if the scholarship has advanced. Some time ago Afrikaans etymological dictionaries said the origin of «oorlog» was uncertain.

level 2

· 1 yr. ago

Swedish N | English C2 | Chinese C1 | Japanese A2 | Korean A1

level 2

· 1 yr. ago · edited 1 yr. ago

Estonian N/ English C2/ French B1/ 🇷🇺 A2/ 🇰🇷 beginner

Damn I was so confused because it just didn’t occur to me that you would read õ as o if you don’t know Estonian. They’re different letters.

Edit: what’s with the downvotes? My brain just couldn’t connect /ɤ/ to /oʊ/

level 1

War is a very pollemic subject in Greece, isn’t it?

I’ll show myself out…

level 1

Fun fact, in Serbian if you say «karas», it means «you fuck»

level 2

· 1 yr. ago

🇷🇺 Н | 🇺🇲 C1 | 🇨🇳 汉语水平考试1.5 | Tatar B1.5

and in russian karasj is a type of fish

level 2

In greek Karas is a vary famous singer (it’s a common surname)

Источник

How did Latin’s «bellum», which I’ve deduced to mean «war», become «guerra» in Spanish and Italian and «guerre» in French and how did «bella» (which I’m assuming means «wars») come to mean «beautiful» in Spanish and Italian (and «belle» in French)?!

Bellum of course means ‘war’, but there was a word bellus that meant ‘nice’, ‘pretty’. A bellus homo was a man who was probably seen as somewhat effeminate, who had his body hair plucked and the like. The expression occurs in one of the Latin poets. Also, Martial calls one Caecilianus’ wild boar dish the latter’s ‘bellus conviva’, his ‘nice guest’.

Guerre/guerra comes ultimately from Old High German werra, ‘quarrel’.

«guerra» is a loan word from the Germanic languages, the English «war» is cognate. Similarly: ward -> guarda

«bellus» is diminutive from bonus (arch. duenos/duonos) -> *benulus -> *benlus (syncope) -> bellus (assim. nl > ll)

«bellum» (arch. duellum) x «bellus» is merely a coincidence

Thank you!

«guerra» is a loan word from the Germanic languages, the English «war» is cognate. Similarly: ward -> guarda

«bellus» is diminutive from bonus (arch. duenos/duonos) -> *benulus -> *benlus (syncope) -> bellus (assim. nl > ll)

«bellum» (arch. duellum) x «bellus» is merely a coincidence

Wait . . . . . I’m confused. Diminutive . . . . ? What’s benelus and benlus, and what does «arch.» mean? Archaic? If so, when was this ARCHAIC form used?

«ben» is «e degree «of the same root of bon-us (is a typical arish phenomenon, you can also see this vocalic change in classical greek: leípo, le-loipa, but also in latin: mens, moneo); -lus/la is the diminutive morpheme in latin: auricula < auris, poenulus < poenus (the little punic man, as in Plautus’ comedy).
bellum (war) has the same root like greek polemos.
As always, sorry because of my english
p.

Duenos (with non-syllabic u), then duonos, are archaic forms of bonus, they are known from Old Latin inscriptions.

The archaic diminutive of duenos would be *duenolos, hence the hypothetical forms (with asterix) *benulus and *benlus, finally the classical form bellus, bella, bellum. Nothing in common with bellum (war), which has the archaic form duellum.

How did Latin’s «bellum», which I’ve deduced to mean «war», become «guerra» in Spanish and Italian and «guerre» in French and how did «bella» (which I’m assuming means «wars») come to mean «beautiful» in Spanish and Italian (and «belle» in French)?!

«Guerra» is from a Germanic source rather than Latin. In other words, it shares the same etymology as English war. Here is the RAE entry:

(Del germ. *werra, pelea, discordia; cf. a. al. ant. wërra, neerl. medio warre).

As for «bella», it comes from Latin bellus which had a similar meaning to the modern Romance words.

Is a cognate of «war» still used in German?
It seems that most other Germanic languages use a word that sounds like «krig» to refer to «war».

Is «war» related to Slavic «vojna»?

Perhaps bellus being related to bonus might explain why «elle est bonne» «está buena» means that a woman is attractive. And also explains why «bonita» (a diminuitive of buena / boa ) means beautiful

Perhaps bellus being related to bonus might explain why «elle est bonne» «está buena» means that a woman is attractive. And also explains why «bonita» (a diminuitive of buena / boa ) means beautiful

On the other side bellus chiefly means good in Latin.

bellum est sua vitia nosse = it’s a good thing to know one’s own faults

Is a cognate of «war» still used in German?
It seems that most other Germanic languages use a word that sounds like «krig» to refer to «war».

No, «war» in German today is «Krieg» and as far as I know it’s «oorlog» in Dutch, so there seems to be nothing left of «werra» and I can’t think of a word sounding alike in my dialect.

No, «war» in German today is «Krieg» and as far as I know it’s «oorlog» in Dutch, so there seems to be nothing left of «werra» and I can’t think of a word sounding alike in my dialect.

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the following German words are derived from the same root as the reconstructed Frankish word *werra (which gave rise to the English and Romance languages words for «war»):

I had also thought that the following words might have to do with *werra as well, but apparently they came from a different root (Proto-Germanic *waraz), which gave rise to the English words wary, aware and beware.

Though the semantic (and phonetic!) similarity is interesting, scholars derive these words from a different root (*werra versus*waraz). Still, *werra is derived from a Proto-Germanic *werso, and *waraz is derived from a Proto Indo-European base *wer- meaning «to cover», so there might be some relation yet! We’d better leave such determinations up to the PhD’s, though!!

Best
mcc7x

How did Latin’s «bellum», which I’ve deduced to mean «war», become «guerra» in Spanish and Italian and «guerre» in French and how did «bella» (which I’m assuming means «wars») come to mean «beautiful» in Spanish and Italian (and «belle» in French)?!

In Tamil, a Dravidian Languages, the following similar cognates are available.

பாழி¹ pāḻi, n. Fight, battle; போர். பாழி கொள்ளு மேமத்தானும் (தொல். பொ. 72).

பொலம்¹ polam, n. Beauty, fairness; அழகு. (திவா.) பொலந்தேர்ப் பொறைய (பதிற்றுப். 84, 6)

வராகம்² varākam, n. Battle; போர். (யாழ். அக.).

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 29, 2009

BP.

Senior Member

Ah the headphones script!

Anyway we have in Urdu and Hindi this word bhalaa (pronounced somewhat like bella, if the aspirated b is too much to imagine) that means good, nice, even beautiful. But Urdu has almost supplanted it by khuub.

I remember Joseph W Campbell saying that «war» and all those variants actually derive from a Gallic (Celtic) war god named «Gorra». That would predate all the references I’ve seen so far. His name is retained in the Irish expression «Begorra». This is a very interesting thread and I thank all the participants.

Yes indeed. But Campbell’s point was that all of those words were derived from the name of a god, whose name incorporated all of those meanings. The Celtic influence on Greek and Latin would have started before the time of Homer. Consider the linguistic correlation between the Saxon War God «Tiw» (as in «Tuesday») and «Zeus» and «Tiw-pitar» (Jupiter) as well as with «duality» and «deity». All of this is rather nebulous of course and is a part of prehistory, not history. That field — Nostratics — is somewhat obscure but my research and that of my colleagues is reaching back many thousands of years. I know that may sound silly, but if a paleontologist can derive an entire dinosaur from one leg bone, the same can be done with words — with numerous mistakes along the way. The process we use derives from that of the first modern philologists: Grimm’s Law. I mention this merely to point out the wild and wonderful aspects of word study. While some of us are (too) serious about these matters, many others regard it as great fun. Thank you for your reply!!!

My first time on this site, and much impressed with subject matters and the fun to be had. So interesting to see the name of the god of war Tiw that gave us Tuesday, because the word now makes sense to me as going back to the number two. And yes, I had always wondered where the word Bellum could come from, but with seeing variations shown here of the root, I can recognize the word duel which we still use today. I know that di- and bi- are both versions of number two and reading duellum (duo) into buellum into bellum is then easy.

War does not necessarily need two sides, as we know from modern times, but I guess in its original form war is that situation where two clash (and not one or three). Fun therefore to see that the god of war that gave us Tuesday has that same visualization.

The German word Krieg is close to the Dutch word krijg, and a warrior in Dutch is also krijger. The verb in Dutch, however, means to get. And I would imagine that the visualization is then similar to outcome, or something as «And the spoils go to…»

I now also see how my own native word oorlog comes from that word war or guerre, with the ‘gw’ not pronounced. Though I do not yet see the log-part. Who knows, it may be a very old version of the -ly ending we have in English and -lich in German, and originally been warly which then next became its own noun.

From Tamil the pol- beginning is fascinating, because it stimulates my mind to see polar as coming from that same origin as well, thinking about an opposite position. The word bi-polar would then using its own root in some kind of fashion twice.

It makes me curious what the word for two is in Tamil and, BelligerentPacifist, what it is in Urdu.

There is no indication that duellum and duo should be etymologically related. You shouldn’t take it for granted.

There is no indication that duellum and duo should be etymologically related. You shouldn’t take it for granted.

Let me start out apologizing, Bernd. I know that I have a manner of writing that is assertive, personally-rightful to a fault, and often contains words that can put people off. It is not my intention to do that, but it is tough to change and in my writing years I have improved myself, but not perfected the son of a gun. I hope you can read through my toughness of words and will regard my words as mine — not as stating the truth for everyone alive (or dead for that matter).

In my views, it is not too difficult to envision what our ancestors had in mind when deciding what words to use. But what it requires for me -to accept a correlation- is that a visualization is possible that fits in the background for at least two somewhat similarly-sounding words, and when the visualization fits in the background for similar words from several languages, then I embrace it even more. I then envision the ancestors of the words to be older than when the background visualization fits only two or a few words.

It is not that I will hold on to the correlation when other evidence shows the word are not related (bella, bellum), but I will hold on to the seemingly strong correlation when nothing else is presented. In the case of your reply, I noticed you did not bring in any argument why duel and duo were not related. You may be right, but please bring in information that shows a different background exists indeed for each word. Right now, I believe to be correct. Prove me wrong, and you have a friend forever.

From duellum, on the other hand, derives the word duel(French and later English), which have been long mistaken from having derived from duo.

The etymology of duellum is unclear. Experience tells us that assuming etymological connections based on mere similarity is ofter a treacherous guide. For words like duellum without any obvious cognates in other IE languages it is practically impossible to reconstruct an origin. I am not saying they aren’t related. I am only warning you not to jump to conclusions. Etymological research relies on a system of cross-checks to discriminate between chance similarities and true connections. Imagine you didn’t have the information that Classical Latin bellum is derived from Old Latin duellum. Then you would probably now been speculating about a relationship between bellum and bellus (beautiful). All very dangerous.

Right now, I believe to be correct. Prove me wrong, and you have a friend forever.

It is much more prudent to take the opposite stance: Don’t assume a relation unless you have some means of cross-checking.

Last edited: Aug 12, 2011

Dictionnaire latin français(1934) suggests the etymology with the PIE dāu-, deu- (« destroy, burn »), from which also derives ancient Greek duē(« misery, suffering »).

Dictionnaire latin français(1934) suggests the etymology with the PIE dāu-, deu- (« destroy, burn »), from which also derives ancient Greek duē(« misery, suffering »).

Yes, thank you. I am aware of that (reproduced here). I find this equally speculative, but it demonstrates nicely that there are equally or even more plausible alternative explanations.

How did Latin’s «bellum», which I’ve deduced to mean «war», become «guerra» in Spanish and Italian and «guerre» in French and how did «bella» (which I’m assuming means «wars») come to mean «beautiful» in Spanish and Italian (and «belle» in French)?!

Let me add another two cents here (maybe my last on this forum), how it is very interesting that in French the words beau and belle mean the same thing, yet are quite distinct. One is male and the other the female version of beautiful (handsome/pretty). Since both are distinct, it may be prudent to look for a distinct difference in feel as well. I like seeking words that remain linked to the statement of war, and refering to the German word Krieg for war and the Dutch word krijger for warrior, the link there was that they refer to ‘to get’, ‘to obtain’, or in war terms: to get the spoils.

Now if we use the winner and that what is won to the words beau and belle, then the feel may be explained. In modern eyes, that may a bit sexist, but then again in French there is a distinction, too.

Further, would it be pushing the envelope to declare that the word beau is related to bon, bueno, buon, which means good, and next that this (particularly buon) is similar to the Germanic word won? While the word belle (as in bellum) is known in a context of war, it would also suggest that the one who won is the one who is the good one. Would makes sense to me to not declare the loser the good one, particularly when the winner gets to rule you.

Beau/belle are the same word with a different declension, Fred-rick. You can say that a male is a belle personne. Also «a beautiful man» is un bel homme, where «bel» has no phonetical difference from «belle.» And these two «words» both decent from bellus/bella. Although bellus/bella itself was a diminutif of bonus/bona it is not exclusive to bellus, obviously.
I think your speculations are not that plausible.

Fredrick,

The Tamil word for Two is «IranDu»,

About the words discussed here,

Tamil word for
War = POr

but
Similar words

Spear=VEl = War could have some connection with «War»?

Won = Venru

IngridP

Well, I had the same question and when you think warriors were considered the definition of beautiful (for men), it now makes sense. war > warrior > beautiful (man) > beautiful (woman)
guerre > guerrier > beau > belle

Bell-us/-a/-um (=beau/belle) were merged phonetically with bellum (=guerre) already in classical Latin. It is quite clear that bellum (=guerre) is derived from earlier duellum. The etymology of bell-us/-a/-um (=beau/belle) beyond classical Latin is unclear. Romance guerra/guerre is derived from Germanic war- (as in English war and German Wirre) and has nothing to do with any of the classical Latin words.

fdb

Senior Member

de Vaan, Etym. dict. of Latin and the other Italic languages (2008) writes:

“The best etymology for duellum so far has been proposed by Pinault 1987, who posits a dim[inutive] *duenelo- to bonus. If *duenelo- meant ‘quite good, quite brave’, its use in the context of war (bella acta, bella gesta) could be understood as a euphemism, ultimately yielding a meaning ‘action of valour, war’ for the noun bellum.”

If correct, this would mean that bellum ‘war’ and bellus ‘good, beautiful’ are in fact etymologically connected.

It obviously must have been an early loanword, already present in Vulgar Latin, eventually replacing any derivatives from BELLUM.

I guess the fact that it might have been coincidental with derivatives from BELLUS is not that important, as the same thing happened with other words too. Besides, central Romances used BELLUS for beautiful (French BEAU, Italian BELLO, Catalan BELL), but peripheral Romances preferred FORMOSUS (Ibero-Romance FERMOSO, Romanian FRUMOS), the use of bello in Spanish being a later thing.

Curiously though, modern Spanish in Spain and Catalan see hermoso and bell as somewhat literary, and tend to prefer derivatives from BONUS for ‘beautiful’ (Sp. bonito, Ct. bonic) in the spoken language.

So, my question is: Why is there no word «guerrulous»? Would seem logical, and completely natural, to me. . .

Источник

The German word for lightning war would be Schlacht. The Germans also call it a blitzkrieg, which is the shortened term of Blitz-Krieg in English.

The “what is blitzkrieg” was a German strategy during World War II. It involved rapid and overwhelming attacks against the enemy, using tanks, air power, artillery, and infantry.

What was the German word for lightning war? |

Blitzkrieg, a German phrase for “lightning war,” is a military strategy that uses mobile troops and locally focused weaponry to cause disarray among opposing forces.

What does the German term blitzkrieg imply in this context?

blitzkrieg. Blitzkrieg is a German term that meaning “quick assault” and is derived from the words blitz, which means “lightning,” and krieg, which means “war.” The “Blitz” is the name given to Germany’s blitzkrieg against England in 1940 and 1941.

What were the four phases of the blitzkrieg, for example? In German military thought, however, an assault may be separated into four (informally: five) phases:

Anmarsch is a German word that means “attack” (march up)
Getting Closer (approach)
a start (break in)
Combat in the depths of space (combat through the depth)
Breakthrough (breakthrough)

So, what exactly is a blitzkrieg attack?

Blitzkrieg (German: “flash war”) is a military strategy that uses surprise, speed, and superiority in materiel or weapons to cause psychological shock and subsequent disorder in opposing troops.

How did the Blitzkrieg vary from World War One?

Blitzkrieg is a German term that means “lightning conflict.” This was the antithesis of trench warfare. The goal of Blitzkrieg was to break through enemy lines as quickly as possible, since trench warfare may take months or even years to complete. During wars against Poland, Belgium, and France, they adopted this tactic.

Answers to Related Questions

What is Blitzkrieg’s other name?

blitzkrieg synonyms | nouncharge

Assault, attack, blitz, bombardment, and offensive are all terms used to describe a military operation.

What exactly does the term Anschluss imply?

The incorporation of Austria into Nazi Germany on March 12, 1938 is known as Anschluss (German: [?an?ls] (listen) “joining”). Until the German orthography change of 1996, the word’s German spelling was Anschluß, and it was also known as the Anschluss sterreichs (pronunciation (help.

What is the origin of the phrase “blitzkrieg”?

Western media used the word “blitzkrieg” to characterize this kind of armored warfare during the invasion of Poland. The word was first used in relation with fast or lightning combat in a German military journal called Deutsche Wehr (German Defense) in 1935.

Blitzkrieg was invented by who?

Guderian, Heinz

What does it mean to be a member of the Luftwaffe?

Luftwaffe. 1. A German term that means “air weapon,” and is used to refer to the German air force. 2. The Luftwaffe of Germany.

How can you put an end to a blitzkrieg?

You may give your defenders time to regroup and construct a new defensive posture to halt the blitzkrieg by slowing down the blitzkrieg movement in your rear. After the supply lines, go after them. Tanks need fuel, and gasoline tankers are very susceptible to assault.

What made the blitzkrieg so effective?

Blitzkrieg operations relied heavily on radio communications, which allowed leaders to coordinate the assault and keep the adversary off guard. When the Polish Army was decimated in a series of encirclement engagements in 1939, these strategies were deployed to great success.

In World War II, how good was the German army?

The German army was a force to be reckoned with. After the war, the Americans conducted a study and found that the German infantry squads were four times more effective than the Allied teams. Martin van Creveld estimated that the German Army was 1.2 times superior than the Allies during the warfare in Western Europe in 1944.

What was the purpose of blitzkrieg?

Blitzkrieg is a phrase used to describe a kind of offensive warfare in which mobile, maneuverable troops, such as armored tanks and air support, are utilized to deliver a quick, targeted blow at an adversary. The goal of such an assault is to achieve a speedy victory while minimizing the loss of men and weaponry.

What is the significance of the name D Day?

“Day” is represented by the letter D. According to the National World War II Museum, the name was customarily used for the date of any major military action or invasion. D-1 denoted the day before to June 6, 1944, whereas D+1, D+2, D+, and so on denoted the days after.

What was the length of time it took for France to fall?

France’s army seemed to Churchill at the time to be a formidable bulwark against prospective Nazi assault against other European states. One of the most spectacular military battles in history was the destruction of this formidable army in only six weeks in 1940.

What was Germany’s motivation for invading Poland?

Poland is invaded by Germany. German armies assault Poland on land and in the air on this day in 1939, as Adolf Hitler strives to reclaim lost territory and eventually dominate Poland. World War II has officially started. The German invasion of Poland served as a model for how Hitler planned to fight war–the “blitzkrieg” approach.

What was the length of the First World War?

World War I (abbreviated as WWI or WW1), often known as the Great War or the First World War, was a worldwide conflict that began in Europe and lasted until November 11, 1918.

Why was there a phony war in the first place?

Conscription, food rationing, and the use of public transportation for military objectives all contributed to the ‘Phoney War’ being a period of discontent and disappointment in the United Kingdom. Germany started assaults on Scandinavia and Western Europe in the spring of 1940.

What was Germany’s goal in World War II?

The real goal was for Nazi Germany to maintain complete postwar continental power. This was to be accomplished by the enlargement of the German state’s geographical basis, as well as the political and economic enslavement of the rest of Europe to Germany.

How did the Allies come out on top in World War II?

In World War II, the Allies’ first aim was to defeat Germany. In World War II, the Allies’ first aim was to defeat Germany. Italy and Japan were never as dangerous as the European superpowers with whom they battled. Their loss, however painful, became unavoidable.

Was strategic bombing successful during World War II?

During WWII, strategic bombing developed quickly. During World War II, strategic bombing – the destruction of enemy military and infrastructure objectives in order to decrease morale — became an important aspect of America’s war strategy, albeit it was sluggish to get off the ground at first.

The “Blitzkrieg” was a German strategy in World War II that involved an invasion of Poland by Germany with its military forces, tanks, and aircraft. The word Blitzkrieg translates to mean lightning war. It was designed to be quick and decisive, using speed and surprise rather than concentration of force. Reference: why was the blitzkrieg effective.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the German word for Hitlers Lightning War?

A: The German word for Hitlers Lightning War is Blitzkrieg.

What is another name for German use of lightning warfare?

A: There is no other name for it. As a German, you would know that Der Blitzkrieg (literal translation of lightning warfare) is the common term for what was known as an air war during World War II in Germany. However, some may call this type of warfare and aerial battle a bombing campaign or even an assault on targets from the sky instead.

What was the German term for the Lightning War quizlet?

A: The German term for the Lightning War quizlet is Blitzkrieg.

why was germany so successful in the early stages of ww2
blitzkrieg ww2
when was blitzkrieg first used
blitzkrieg synonym

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website

Источник

Hey, in Dutch there is something as «in de war zijn», which means «to be confused». Is the Dutch «war» the same as the English war in the meaning of disruption or something like that? Mallerd 10:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don’t know much about Dutch, but I think the answer is probably yes. The English word war was borrowed from Old French (it’s essentially the same as French guerre), which in turn was a borrowing from Old High German werra which meant ‘confusion’. Probably Old Saxon had a similar word which led to the modern Dutch form. (It’s theorised that the French and other Romance-speaking peoples had to borrow a Germanic word for war, because the native form from Latin bellum sounded too much like bello- ‘beautiful’, and the Germanic languages amazingly enough never had a standard prosaic word for war, so ‘confusion’ was the nearest they could get.) Widsith 11:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the Dutch word war is probably cognate with the English word, but the meaning is not the same. The Dutch that means war is oorlog, while the Dutch word war means confusion, disorder. Dutch war is, I believe, related to Dutch warboel (tangle, chaos), warwinkel (tangle, chaos), verwarren (to entangle, to confuse), verwarring (confusion, disorder), as well as to German Wirrwarr (clutter) and verwirren (to confuse, to perplex). Rather than being a loanword from English, I think Dutch war is from Proto-Germanic *werso, which is also the etymon for German verwirren (to confuse) and the English word war. —Stephen 13:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay

thanks, by the way do you know if there are any etymological dictionaries available? Not just by the internet I mean. In bookstores or are they exclusive? Mallerd 17:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh yes 1 more thing then, do you know why German, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian have the word krig, Krieg for war and Dutch oorlog? Oorlog is so much different and the only Dutch meaning is war. Do you know that as well? Mallerd 17:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think oorlog is cognate with war+lay, originally meaning something like «conflict destiny». The German word Krieg is from MHG kriec (exertion, enmity, opposition) < OHG krig (stubbornness, defiance), cognate with Greek ύβρις (outrage). As for etymological dictionaries, there are numerous available, depending on the languages you are mainly interested in. If you speak Dutch, Dutch is nicely dealt with in the Van Dale Dutch Dictionary. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language has excellent etymology information in it. The University of Texas has an interesting etymology site at http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/ielex/PokornyMaster-X.html. —Stephen 21:37, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We just picked a different word as our main word, but there are lots of traces of a krig cognate (krijg in our case), that are still in use. For example krijger = warrior, krijgsheer = warlord, krijgskunst = art of war, etc. —⁠This unsigned comment was added by 24.82.136.160 (talk) at 05:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC).Reply[reply]

How is it that people are confirming that war is derived from ONF guerre? Could it not also be that the two words developed independently from each other (though they are obviously of the same root), as it seems that Anglo-Saxon had a similar, though rather uncommon, word werre that was not borrowed from Norman French. Though many sites on the internet seem to point that modern «war» is derived from Norman French, several older book sources state that «war» has stayed in the language and is derived directly from a Germanic root, which is also the source of «worse», rather than having been brought into the language again via another language (Norman French.) I’m not sure if there has been any insights into this etymology, but the etymology that «war» is the derivative of guerre and not just a cognate doesn’t to have conclusive evidence. Anyway, just asking. -Noimnotokay 03:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don’t think you read the etymology. It says: Anglo-Norman werre < Old Northern French werre, a variant of Old French guerre < Old Franconian werra, ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *werza- («confusion»). —Stephen 17:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 21JAN2011 this explanation was added: «Or from Middle English werre, from Late Old English werre, wyrre «armed conflict» from Old Northern French werre (compare Old French guerre, gwerre),of Ancient Greek origin, from Latin verro (“go,sweep,sweep away,contend ,raid”),from Ancient Greek ερρω (“go,sweep,sweep away,contend ,raid”).» and soon after reverted. Now it has been put in again. I would have expected some substantiation for such a non-standard explanation. In addition, it confuses cognates and etymons and a French/Normal French «gw»/»w» is quite a reliable sign for a Germanic loan. If it were inherited from Latin, the change from «v» to «gu»/»gw»/»w» needed a very good explanation before this etymology could be seriously considered. I will revert it again. Berndf 21:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The definition of war as arm-using event is wrong. War is to impose one person or entity own’s will over another person or entity.
So to buy a pear in a countryside environment is a way of imposing over capitalists, that is banks, to change their way of doing things, that is kill everyone who opposes them by starvation by decapitation etc., it is War. People playing with handguns are, grown-up children who still have not left childhood. —⁠This unsigned comment was added by 87.1.36.241 (talk) at 20:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Evidence for this? Equinox ◑ 20:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I’d always assumed that Wehr was the direct German cognate of English war and OHG werra, but apparently they’re not even known to be related. The PIE roots we give are similar, and I think tracing the root for war to a word meaning «thresh» is a bit of a stretch considering that the metaphorical meanings seem to be confined entirely to Germanic, so Im tempted to think that they come from the same root after all, but nobody else seems to believe that (e.g., Etymonline agrees with us), so there must be some reason why this seemingly obvious connection is not being made. Soap (talk) 16:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Источник

I wonder why in all Romance languages the word «war» («guerra», with their multiple intonations) is a term that comes from Germanic languages, and that no modern language resembles the Latin «bellum». In English it actually came from Old French, which in turn came from Frankish.

It seems to me particularly curious since «war» is a term so significant for Latin tradition, and also the contrary, «peace», is inherited in almost intact form in all Romance languages and even in English from the Latin «pax».

asked May 17, 2021 at 15:40

A why-question is almost unanswerable, the answer is «because it happened so». But there was a strong trigger for the replacement of bellum, namely the homophony with the word for «beautiful», in Latin bellus, bella, bellum. So for the stem bell- the meaning «beautiful» won over «war», and the word for war was replaced with a borrowing from Germanic or, as in the case of Romanian, other languages.

answered May 17, 2021 at 16:16

Sir CornflakesSir Cornflakes

28.6k3 gold badges63 silver badges122 bronze badges

The basic meaning of the Germanic *wirr is “disorder, chaos” etc. The shift in meaning to “warfare” originated in Frankish and is attested since the 9th century in High German, English, but not Frankish, spreading to French and then to other Romance languages. So this really has nothing to do with Roman soldiers. It bears witness to the fact that in the Frankish kingdom Latin was the language of religion and administration, but Frankish was the language of the army.

Tristan

6,04518 silver badges35 bronze badges

answered May 18, 2021 at 10:43

fdbfdb

23.2k1 gold badge33 silver badges66 bronze badges

My Latin book in high school contained the theory that bellum referred to the well disciplined style practiced by the roman legions, while warra was the less disciplined fighting style adopted by the german tribes.

With the fall of the empire, warra was the mainly adopted style, and thus also the word took over across the former territories of the empire.

answered May 18, 2021 at 5:37

Источник