All Scandinavian languages: to like someone

T

ThomasK

Senior Member
(near) Kortrijk, Belgium
Belgium, Dutch
I do not know any SWE, NOR, DAN, ..., but I just wondered: how do you translate 'like' in your languages ? And is 'love' different

(In Dutch we say :
- houden van (like, love), maybe leuk vinden --- Ik hou van Z
- liefhebben, beminnen (love) [minne = love, lief has the same root as love, i believe] --- Ik heb Z lief, ik bemin Z
- ... )
 
    • ThomasK said:
    I do not know any SWE, NOR, DAN, ..., but I just wondered: how do you translate 'like' in your languages ? And is 'love' different
    Click to expand...

    In Norwegian we have "å like" ("to like"), "å være glad i" (approx. "to be fond of") and "å elske" ("to love").

    Thus, "jeg liker X", "jeg er glad i X" or "jeg elsker X". "Like" is used as much for things as for people (e.g. food or activities).

    There is generally more of a distinction between "å være glad i" and "å elske" than in English (they could both be translated with "to love"), and "å elske" is really more or less restricted to amorous and serious relationships.
     
    I agree that "elske" holds amorous connotations in Norwegian. I personally wouldn't say "Jeg elsker foreldrene/barna mine" ("I love my parents/children"), but I know that some would disagree. (For the record I would use "Jeg er glad i..." instead.)

    There's also: "Jeg er forelsket i X" ("I am in love with X").
    And: "De elsket" ("they made love").
    And of course the hyperbolic: "Jeg elsker is" ("I love ice cream")
     
    Last edited:
    ThomasK said:
    Is 'elske' somehow related to some (West) Germanic word (ENG, GER, DUT) ? Can't think of any now, but...
    Click to expand...

    I have read that it's a West Germanic invention, but I can't think of any words in modern Germanic languages that it might be related to either... Apparently it's related to Norwegian "ild" ("fire") with the original sense of having warm feelings for someone, and is thus a metaphor. It has various derivatives in Norwegian, such as "elskov" ("love" [noun]/"act of love"), "elskede" ("beloved") and "elsker"/"elskerinne" ("lover"/"mistress").
     
    I think the word for love took two different paths and 'elska/elske' was passed on from Old Norse while the West Germanic influences took a different form love/liebe etc..
     
    ThomasK said:
    Is 'elske' somehow related to some (West) Germanic word (ENG, GER, DUT) ? Can't think of any now, but...
    Click to expand...

    Historically the word has had the meaning 'nourish' at least when talking about animals. It is cognate to Latin alere, 'to nourish' and to English old (one who has had a lot of growing strength): http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE11.html

    I draw your attention to this thread, with a lot on the Scandinavian languages as well.
     
    The ild/fire metaphor is of course a so called folk etymology. It has some relevance as a contemporary association but it has nothing to do with the history of the word. Ild is reconstructed as *ai(d)lida-
     
    Obil Tu said:
    Apparently it's related to Norwegian "ild" ("fire") with the original sense of having warm feelings for someone, and is thus a metaphor.
    Click to expand...

    Just as an aside point, I think the relation might be more recogniseable in Swedish and nynorsk, which have preserved the 'e' - "eld". The same possibly goes for Icelandic, but I don't know the language well enough to say.
     
    Pteppic said:
    Just as an aside point, I think the relation might be more recogniseable in Swedish and nynorsk, which have preserved the 'e' - "eld". The same possibly goes for Icelandic, but I don't know the language well enough to say.
    Click to expand...


    Well, apparently it's "just" folk etymology anyway. I didn't know; I found it in an interview with a professor of etymology (http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/for-ansatte/ILOS-posten/desember07/forskning.html – Norwegian only, I'm afraid! :() and assumed it was an accepted one. There's an excerpt of the alleged etymology on the bottom of the linked page, btw.
     
    Hehe, thanks for bouncing this thread - I meant to reply for Danish, but I forgot ;).

    For "love" we have "elske" like the Norwegians.
    For "like" we have "kan lide" (where "lide" literally means "suffer"), or a bit stronger and more commonly used "kan godt lide" ("godt" = "well").
     
    Obil Tu said:
    Well, apparently it's "just" folk etymology anyway. I didn't know; I found it in an interview with a professor of etymology (http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/for-ansatte/ILOS-posten/desember07/forskning.html – Norwegian only, I'm afraid! :() and assumed it was an accepted one. There's an excerpt of the alleged etymology on the bottom of the linked page, btw.
    Click to expand...

    It takes time for new etymologies to establish themselves. Apparently we have a serious new proposal here, but will it carry?

    How would this scholar explain that Old Danish/Swedish and Old Norwegian had älsk- with a half open vowel? Starting from **ailiska- one should expect **eilska in Icelandic/Norwegian and **elska in Old Swedish.
    May be some conditioning?

    And what is supposedly wrong with the traditional etymology < *aliska?
     
    Last edited:
    Obil Tu said:
    Well, apparently it's "just" folk etymology anyway. I didn't know; I found it in an interview with a professor of etymology (http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/for-ansatte/ILOS-posten/desember07/forskning.html – Norwegian only, I'm afraid! :() and assumed it was an accepted one. There's an excerpt of the alleged etymology on the bottom of the linked page, btw.
    Click to expand...

    dinji said:
    It takes time for new etymologies to establish themselves. Apparently we have a serious new proposal here, but will it carry?

    How would this scholar explain that Old Danish/Swedish and Old Norwegian had älsk- with a half open vowel? Starting from **ailiska- one should expect **eilska in Icelandic/Norwegian and **elska in Old Swedish.
    May be some conditioning?

    And what is supposedly wrong with the traditional etymology < *aliska?
    Click to expand...

    Well, I bought this dictionary and it is really the most up to date and profound dictonary on the core of the inherited Scandinavian vocabulary. Best of all, it has systematically treated the Indo-European parallels and consistently serves us with reconstructed forms, including Proto-Germanic, Paleo-Germanic, Pre-Germanic and PIE with laryngeals.

    The author critisises the traditional established etymology for the Old Norse adjective elskr (supposedly < *aliska-) because it presupposes a derivate from a strong verb by means of *-iska- for which there are no parallels. Also for the semantic development ('nourishing' > 'loving') he claims no parallels can be found.

    He also believes it to be phonologically problematic that *aliska- should have given elskr. *Daniska- has given dansk 'danish' and *batista- has given bazst (later by analogy best) 'best'. He admits though on this third argument that several interpratations of the data is possible.

    On *ailisko:n he claims that *-aiCCC in this case could have given eCCC as in helg 'holyday' (and not eiCCC as in Old Norse beisk 'bitter'). He does not refer to the East Scandinavian data but a quick look at the words that he refers to as parallels seem to verify that in this environment before a heavy consonant cluster the /ä/ of Old Swedish älska is not in contradicton with an origin from Common-Norse *aiCC < *aiCiC.

    Upon reflection I see no reason why this new etymology could not become established as a first alterntive. NB though it is not a derivate from eld/ild 'fire' but both words would be parallell derivates from the extinct stem aila-, which is attested in Old Runic with a similar meaning as eld/ild.
     
    Last edited:
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top