guerra di sbarramento

Girl_Afraid

Member
Italian - Italy
Salve a tutti,

sto cercando suggerimenti su come tradurre la frase in oggetto. Il testo si riferisce alla Prima Guerra Mondiale; la frase completa è "La Grande Guerra si trasformò ben presto in guerra di sbarramento e di posizione [...]".

Avrei pensato a "barrage war" ma non sono sicura che sia corretto. Potete aiutarmi?

Grazie mille in anticipo a tutti :)
 
  • Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    A sbarramento is a blockade, not a barrage of fire :) Direi "a war of blockades"

    Sarebbe comunque utile sapere un po' di più sul contesto - cosa dice dopo sui sbarramenti e le posizioni? C'è qualcosa utile?
     

    Girl_Afraid

    Member
    Italian - Italy
    A sbarramento is a blockade, not a barrage of fire :) Direi "a war of blockades"

    Sarebbe comunque utile sapere un po' di più sul contesto - cosa dice dopo sui sbarramenti e le posizioni? C'è qualcosa utile?

    non molto di più in realtà; sostanzialmente dice che la Prima Guerra Mondiale era iniziata come "guerra di movimento", ma poi i due eserciti hanno consolidato le rispettive posizioni, anche a causa dell'utilizzo dell'artiglieria, e la guerra è diventata "[...] di sbarramento e di posizione, in cui divenne preminente il ruolo devastante dell'artiglieria." Poi si parla della comparsa degli aerei e dei gas, e di come quindi la ww1 sia la "prima guerra industriale".

    Pensavo che per "sbarramento" si intendesse una specie di trincea, ma forse non c'entra nulla? :confused:
     

    Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    Sono d'accordo con Mary che positions non è il massimo, ma neanche position, secondo me. Userei war of blockades and (strategic) positioning. (Metti strategic se vuoi, o lascialo se no.)
     

    Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    Well a trench is a trincea in Italian, right? So it doesn't look like exactly the same thing.
     

    Mary49

    Senior Member
    Italian
    Well a trench is a trincea in Italian, right? So it doesn't look like exactly the same thing.
    I think it does: http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/posizione/ "Guerra di posizione (in antitesi a guerra di movimento), quella nella quale i due eserciti avversarî rimangono fermi per lungo tempo, schierati l’uno di fronte all’altro e protetti da trincee e altre opere campali".
    "War of position" is a sociological idea by Antonio Gramsci, in opposition to a "War of Manoeuvre" http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/h/e.htm "He accused Rosa Luxemburg and Leon Trotsky of underestimating the depth of resources of the capitalist state, which required a protacted “war of position” in order to undermine it, remove from one social position after another, and eventually overthrow it, rather than a rapid “war of movement”, by which the revolutionaries could hope to smash the bourgeoisie's defences..."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_hegemony "To that end, Antonio Gramsci proposed a strategic distinction, between a War of Position and a War of Manœuvre. The war of position is an intellectual and cultural struggle wherein the anti-capitalist revolutionary creates a proletarian culture whose native value system counters the cultural hegemony of the bourgeoisie. The proletarian culture will increase class consciousness, teach revolutionary theory and historical analysis, and thus propagate further revolutionary organisation among the social classes. On winning the war of position, socialist leaders would then have the necessary political power and popular support to begin the political manœuvre warfare of revolutionary socialism".
    Nothing to do with World War I.
     

    Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    Err, no. The Italian term is guerra di posizione not guerra di trincea (which is trench warfare in English).

    I am not in favour of translating this with war of position (see post 9) - that was your suggestion ;)

    I suggested war of blockades and (strategic) positioning, which has nothing to do with Gramsci.
     

    Girl_Afraid

    Member
    Italian - Italy
    What about "war of attrition" = "guerra di logoramento"? Ho trovato questo termine varie volte in rete. Ho provato a cercare "war of positioning" ma mi rimanda comunque a Gramsci...
     

    elfa

    Senior Member
    English
    I agree with Tegs that you cannot say "war of position" in this context. I think her idea of "war of strategic positioning" is good - or "trench warfare" if that is what is meant.
    "War of attrition" is another thing entirely, and doesn't seem to fit here.
    Could "war of strategic defences" also be a possibility?
     

    Tegs

    Mód ar líne
    English (Ireland)
    Huh, that's weird! If you look from the other direction, Italian to English, barrage doesn't come up at all!

    barramento nm (atto o effetto dello sbarrare)blockage, obstruction, barricade, blockade n

    Mary - I stand corrected. If the dictionary says guerra di trincea and guerra di posizione are synonyms then I misunderstood them to be two different things. :)
     

    Odysseus54

    Mod huc mod illuc
    Italian - Marche
    Huh, that's weird! If you look from the other direction, Italian to English, barrage doesn't come up at all!

    barramento nm (atto o effetto dello sbarrare)blockage, obstruction, barricade, blockade n

    Mary - I stand corrected. If the dictionary says guerra di trincea and guerra di posizione are synonyms then I misunderstood them to be two different things. :)

    I wouldn't say that they are synonims , but they are not two different things.

    Trench warfare is a sub-set of 'position warfare', which also includes, for instance, siege and the use of strategic fortified lines.

    An example of 'position warfare' doctrine was the creation of the Maginot line. Force against opposite force, straight on.

    The opposite of that was, for instance, the German 'blitzkrieg' - fast and deep attacks with the purpose of collapsing entire sections of the front, or of capturing or destroying important strategic enemy assets.

    This terminology was not invented by Gramsci - he applied it to his thoughts on politics and the Italian situation in the 20's.

    On 'blockade' I would add that this is a term more often used in naval warfare, but not only, which defines military operations aiming at cutting off an area or a city from receiving supplies. The battle of Leningrad was an example of a blockade in WWII.

    I think when Gramsci speaks of 'guerra di sbarramento' , he alludes to the rigidity of the frontlines, as in WWII and as in his metaphore of the class confrontation as he saw it. Not a blockade, but a front where the two opposing camps collide, so to say, each one trying to stop the other one from advancing.

    I have never heard of 'guerra di sbarramento' as a military term ( which does not mean it doesn't exist ) and I don't know of an English term to convey that idea as I understand it. But 'blockade war' it's not.

    Perhaps "(fortified) front-line warfare".

    "Barrage" generally indicated what in Italian is called "fuoco di sbarramento".
     
    Last edited:

    MR1492

    Senior Member
    English -USA
    I won't copy or quote Ody but he is totally correct in his assessment. The First World War began as a war of manuever and quickly degenerated in to a static war of bombardment and hardened positional warfare.

    As for the definition, sbarramento appears to have a reference of some sort to barrage. As I've said, it is not something I know but it is supported by the WR dictionary. I'll leave the details of Italian definitions to those more qualified than me. However, it certainly appears from all the above that the OP isn't totally incorrect.

    Thank you, Ody. I was afraid to post as it seemed everyone was convinced the translation of sbarramento as barrage was totally wrong. Yet when I found it, I doubted whether or not to post it. Folks here have been a bit confrontational versus helpful lately and I wondered if posting was even worth the trouble.

    Thanks again, Ody. You have restored my faith in the WR community.

    Phil
     

    Odysseus54

    Mod huc mod illuc
    Italian - Marche
    I won't copy or quote Ody but he is totally correct in his assessment. The First World War began as a war of manuever and quickly degenerated in to a static war of bombardment and hardened positional warfare.

    As for the definition, sbarramento appears to have a reference of some sort to barrage. As I've said, it is not something I know but it is supported by the WR dictionary. I'll leave the details of Italian definitions to those more qualified than me. However, it certainly appears from all the above that the OP isn't totally incorrect.


    Phil


    What I am saying , though, Phil, is that when I hear barrage I think of artillery warfare only, ( the equivalent term in Italian, if I am right , would be "fuoco di sbarramento" ) whereas I think the way the term is used in this text refers to the rigid defense of real estate.

    The closest term that I can come out with would be 'containment', with the caveat that nowadays we are used to hearing it as a grand strategy concept in asymmetrical contexts. ( containment of Muslim terrorism/insurrection, containment of the drug cartels, containment of piracy etc etc )

    So, maybe, "guerra di sbarramento e di posizione" could be rendered with "containment- and position(al) warfare". What do you think ?
     

    MR1492

    Senior Member
    English -USA
    So, maybe, "guerra di sbarramento e di posizione" could be rendered with "containment- and position(al) warfare". What do you think ?

    Ody,

    Based on the additional information you provided here and in your previous posts, I would concur. I agree that the term barrage in English is describing the artillery portion of the conduct of operations in WW I. However, that aspect was part and parcel of the positional warfare/trench warfare which developed after the initial German assault through Belgium and the failure to take Paris immediately.

    So, based on the above and your previous posts, might the terms "guerra di sbarramento e posizione" be correct if we take the artillery warfare part of the war as intrinsic to the "sbarramento" portion?

    Basically, I agree!

    Phil
     

    Odysseus54

    Mod huc mod illuc
    Italian - Marche
    Ody,

    Based on the additional information you provided here and in your previous posts, I would concur. I agree that the term barrage in English is describing the artillery portion of the conduct of operations in WW I. However, that aspect was part and parcel of the positional warfare/trench warfare which developed after the initial German assault through Belgium and the failure to take Paris immediately.

    So, based on the above and your previous posts, might the terms "guerra di sbarramento e posizione" be correct if we take the artillery warfare part of the war as intrinsic to the "sbarramento" portion?

    Basically, I agree!

    Phil

    The thing is, this is a metaphore, describing not so much military operations, but rather the interaction of competing socio-political blocks, and the way I understand the Italian 'sbarramento' is "to deny access" - what a fortified line does more exclusively than an "artillery barrage", which can be used both defensively and offensively, as you know better than I do.

    That's why I suggest 'containment'..
     

    MR1492

    Senior Member
    English -USA
    The thing is, this is a metaphore, describing not so much military operations, but rather the interaction of competing socio-political blocks, and the way I understand the Italian 'sbarramento' is "to deny access" - what a fortified line does more exclusively than an "artillery barrage", which can be used both defensively and offensively, as you know better than I do.

    That's why I suggest 'containment'..:tick:

    D'accordo!
     

    GavinW

    Senior Member
    British English
    That's why I suggest 'containment'..

    Having rightly jettisoned "barrage" as totally misleading (which I totally agree with), and on the basis of your further descriptions, I'm inclined to seriously consider a translation which uses your term, "fortified", ie "a war of fortified positions", "a fortified positional war/fortified positional warfare", or "a war involving fortified lines" (or some variant of the above). I think that conveys the most salient feature(s) of said style of war(fare).

    I think "containment" is too abstract in my honest opinion. (EDIT: ditto "interdiction", which also sounds too modern and/or sophisticated and/or "articolato".)
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    elfa

    Senior Member
    English
    Having rightly jettisoned "barrage" as totally misleading (which I totally agree with), and on the basis of your further descriptions, I'm inclined to seriously consider a translation which uses your term, "fortified", ie "a war of fortified positions", "a fortified positional war/fortified positional warfare", or "a war involving fortified lines" (or some variant of the above). I think that conveys the most salient feature(s) of said style of war(fare).

    Gavin, do you not think that "fortified" suggests a construction of some sort? If you look at the definition of "fortification", Wiki talks about "military constructions and buildings" and, to my mind, "fortified" is closely related to that. Given that we're talking about (mostly) trench warfare here, does not this give the wrong impression?
     

    GavinW

    Senior Member
    British English
    Gavin, do you not think that "fortified" suggests a construction of some sort?

    Well, I was going by Mary's definition in post 6: "defensive structures". The link she gave also has pictures of above-ground features (mostly above-ground bunkers, with gun emplacements/feritoie). That being the case, and given we are not just talking about trenches (below-ground features), I felt entitled to extend the meaning of "fortified". I also believe this term can include trenches, especially where, as here, the trenches themselves are apparently/presumably linked to the aforementioned surface features (as tunnel entrances). Hmm. A conundrum, methinks.
     

    Odysseus54

    Mod huc mod illuc
    Italian - Marche
    Well, I was going by Mary's definition in post 6: "defensive structures". The link she gave also has pictures of above-ground features (mostly above-ground bunkers, with gun emplacements/feritoie). That being the case, and given we are not just talking about trenches (below-ground features), I felt entitled to extend the meaning of "fortified". I also believe this term can include trenches, especially where, as here, the trenches themselves are apparently/presumably linked to the aforementioned surface features (as tunnel entrances). Hmm. A conundrum, methinks.

    If I don't remember wrong, in his writings on this subject ( which is really about the rejection of all-out insurrectional strategies in favor of a strategy of gaining the advantage in single areas of society - e.g. culture, school, unions, cooperatives, local goverment etc ) , Gramsci specifically mentions 'casematte' ( 'bunkers' ) as a metaphore for these areas , points of interest and hubs of power/consensus to be 'occupied' ( influenced ) by the initiative of the party, with the aim of altering the overall balance of power.

    I don't mind 'interdiction' , though, as in " ..a war of interdiction and fortified positions " or similar. Gramsci's style is quite sophisticated, by the way, and modern.
     
    Top