Jump to content

The Language (and travel) Thread


Carol the Dabbler

Recommended Posts

The complete traditional title is Rotkäppchen und der böse Wolf, Little Red Cap and the Wicked Wolf.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting.  I wonder if the "Riding Hood" version came from some other continental-European country, or if it's an English-language original.

Oh, wait, a number of internet sites state that the modern German word comes from Middle High German kappe, meaning "hooded cloak," so the story apparently dates back to that era -- but the modern English word "cap" comes from Latin by way of French, so it apparently never had the "hooded cloak" meaning.  This may explain why, even if the folk tale itself may have come into English from German, its English title has traditionally used the word "hood" rather than "cap," and thus preserved the original meaning better than the modern German version apparently does.

Martina (or other German speakers) -- what sort of head covering do the German illustrations show on the girl?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both, actually. Sometimes it's a hooded cloak, sometimes just a cap, occasionally some kind of headscarf. (google "Rotkäppchen" and you'll see for yourself). Maybe it did start out as a hooded cloak and then morphed, just like the word did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2024 at 6:11 PM, Caya said:

Sometimes it's a hooded cloak, sometimes just a cap, occasionally some kind of headscarf. (google "Rotkäppchen" and you'll see for yourself)

So I did that [here's a link], and you're quite correct.  Plus there was at least one instance of what I'd call a red bonnet -- sort of a cloakless hood held on with wide ribbons tied beneath the girl's chin:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTEO1-93ppoTs_vsKSmAs5

There also seems to be a brand of wine -- whose ads sometimes feature a not-so-little girl!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm puzzled by a phrase (referring to clothing) in an ad that keeps popping up on my cell phone: "matching suit set."

How is that any different from a "suit"?  Has the meaning of "suit" (which I would define as a matching set of pants and/or skirt, jacket, and optional vest) changed over the past few decades?  Or are they making sure to be Perfectly Clear for No Apparent Reason (it's an ad for a Google app, not for clothing)?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got curious and poked around the internet a bit more.  Apparently it's now popular to offer suit pieces individually, in which case they're called "suit separates" or "mix and match" -- so perhaps "matching suit sets" really does serve to clarify when traditional suits are being offered.

Language does tend to change over time, especially when new concepts arise -- but it seems to be changing an awful lot recently!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...

I love True Crime and some narrators always use the term 'she/he wants the cake and eats it, too' (mostly to describe crimes that involve greed or possessiveness). This actually drives me nuts. I mean WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT A CAKE BUT NOT TO EAT IT?!?

GET MYCROFT!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, VBS!   :wave:

English, like most other languages, is sometimes ambiguous, which can easily lead to confusion.

The expression "have one's cake and eat it too" can mean either sequentially (as you interpret it) or concurrently (as seems to be the intended meaning).  In other words, one cannot eat something and also keep it (except perhaps around one's hips).

Also, old sayings tend to need interpretation eventually, as the language changes.  I'm not sure whether that particular saying makes more sense to me than it does to you simply because I grew up with it or because the language has changed slightly during my lifetime.  Possibly both.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/27/2024 at 4:17 AM, Carol the Dabbler said:

Hi, VBS!   :wave:

English, like most other languages, is sometimes ambiguous, which can easily lead to confusion.

The expression "have one's cake and eat it too" can mean either sequentially (as you interpret it) or concurrently (as seems to be the intended meaning).  In other words, one cannot eat something and also keep it (except perhaps around one's hips).

Also, old sayings tend to need interpretation eventually, as the language changes.  I'm not sure whether that particular saying makes more sense to me than it does to you simply because I grew up with it or because the language has changed slightly during my lifetime.  Possibly both.

 

I think this is the best explanation which makes it slightly more understandable now. 

The context with what I watch is probably along the line 'keep the cake (maybe for later) and also eat one now.'

Still, I am against not eating a cake rightaway :p

 

One of others that drive me nuts is 'I'm up for' or 'I'm down' means the same thing. The other day it stopped me a while to decide how to respond, whether it's up or down (because I was sure I have heard two versions before), but as usual, I always doubt myself and needed to double check. So, I just choose other answers like count me in or I am okay, then retreated to check instead of humiliating myself (which I still do anyway in other terms I am confident with but wrong!)

 

I have read the origins of these two terms, but just to show you how confusing English can be.

 

Another example: someone talked about 'hair of the dog' in his list of hangover cure he didn't want, and I took it literally and responded that I didn't mind hair of my dog in my drink!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Van Buren Supernova said:

The context with what I watch is probably along the line 'keep the cake (maybe for later) and also eat one now.'

People tend to assume that everyone is just as familiar with an old saying as they are, so they feel free to play with the sayings a bit -- meaning that anyone who doesn't automatically think of the original meaning is likely to be confused.

This isn't quite the same thing, but it's similar:  My husband and I are fond of the Nero Wolfe mystery novels written by Rex Stout -- but we often have to "translate" the dialog, because even though Stout was writing the novels into the 1970s, he had been born in the 1880s, so some of the expressions he used had changed meaning during his lifetime.  (For example, when his characters say "That's fantastic!" they mean it's like a fantasy, i.e. not believable, whereas nowadays it generally means wonderful.)

20 hours ago, Van Buren Supernova said:

One of others that drive me nuts is 'I'm up for' or 'I'm down' means the same thing. The other day it stopped me a while to decide how to respond, whether it's up or down (because I was sure I have heard two versions before), but as usual, I always doubt myself and needed to double check. So, I just choose other answers like count me in or I am okay, then retreated to check instead of humiliating myself (which I still do anyway in other terms I am confident with but wrong!)

I'm right with you there -- the internet seems to be sprouting new sayings faster than I can keep up!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2025 at 2:14 AM, Van Buren Supernova said:

The context with what I watch is probably along the line 'keep the cake (maybe for later) and also eat one now.'

To me, it's describing an impossible task, often driven by greed or selfishness.
If you eat a cake, you "destroy it", so you won't have it anymore, if you want to keep it, you can't eat it.
It's physics.

"I want to spend my money on stupid expensive stuff, but I also want to save for a new car."
… things like that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm with VBS on this question -- cut the cake in half, put one in the freezer, and eat the other one.  Or in J.P.'s analogy, save some of my money and spend the rest -- though hopefully I'd spend most of it on useful, necessary items.

But the old saying apparently refers to situations where that's not possible.  For example, if I were single and someone wanted to marry me, and I enjoyed his attentions but didn't like him well enough to marry him, I might string him along in hopes that he'd never realize I was taking advantage of him.  In other words, he's the cake.  Sooner or later, he'll probably realize what I'm doing, and might even quote that old saying when he dumps me.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2025 at 11:41 PM, J.P. said:

To me, it's describing an impossible task, often driven by greed or selfishness.

On 1/6/2025 at 12:14 AM, Carol the Dabbler said:

But the old saying apparently refers to situations where that's not possible. 

You both are right, the term refers to someone being greedy, like they have a family, but want a mistress, or want to keep a double lives, things like that.

Actually, it's quite obvious (after Carol explained it), not sure why I didn't get the logic :blush:. I know what they meant from the context, but every time I heard it, I got furious with the terms and my mind didn't work. The idea of not eating that cake somehow drives me nuts (still!). What did John or Sherlock say? Clot?

I'd rather they don't use cake, maybe keeps the pants and wears it, too? :huh: No? Sherlock couldn't wear his pants and keep it too in Buckingham Palace, could he?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 1 Anonymous, 66 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of UseWe have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.Privacy PolicyGuidelines.