Talk:geweer
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Lambiam in topic het geweer
het geweer[edit]
@Lingo Bingo Dingo, Morgengave, Rua — Dutch geweer, sense 3: (absolute use only: het geweer) A defensive attitude or position. Does het geweer in this sense ever occur other than in the combination in het geweer? (If this is the only form, then I think it should be lemmatized as such.) --Lambiam 12:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Lambian I have not encountered it in this sense in contemporary Dutch (except indeed for "in het geweer (komen) tegen"), but perhaps it did so in older modern Dutch? Morgengave (talk) 14:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Lambiam, Morgengave I too cannot recall any recent examples, but the WNT has some cites with different constructions (A, "in 't geweer, onder 't geweer") meaning "onder de wapenen" (≈ "bearing arms, having been armed"). I would say their statement "Thans echter denkt men bij in 't geweer voornamelijk aan geweer in den zin van fr. fusil." does not apply anymore and perhaps never applied at all.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)- I assume that the phrase “voorheen ook onder ’t geweer”, already found in the 1889 edition of the WNT,[1] means that use with that preposition is now obsolete. The sense “onder de wapenen” is not represented at our lemma; I guess it is also obsolete except for surviving in a figurative sense, the present sense 3. I see now that the Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands writes: “Alle oudere betekenissen van geweer zijn verouderd, met uitzondering van die in de vaste uitdrukking in het geweer komen ‘zich verdedigen’.”[2] That sense seems to be relatively recent, since it is not clearly represented in the WNT. All this only appears to strengthen the argument for a separate lemma for in het geweer, replacing the present sense 3. --Lambiam 20:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I also think onder 't geweer is obsolete.
- Yes, I think our sense 3 is indeed supposed to render the same meaning as onder de wapenen, although it is not a good substitute in my view.
- I agree that in het geweer or in het geweer komen is justified as an entry (the other should be a hard redirect to the lemma) and that the current sense 3 can go.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 08:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- I assume that the phrase “voorheen ook onder ’t geweer”, already found in the 1889 edition of the WNT,[1] means that use with that preposition is now obsolete. The sense “onder de wapenen” is not represented at our lemma; I guess it is also obsolete except for surviving in a figurative sense, the present sense 3. I see now that the Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands writes: “Alle oudere betekenissen van geweer zijn verouderd, met uitzondering van die in de vaste uitdrukking in het geweer komen ‘zich verdedigen’.”[2] That sense seems to be relatively recent, since it is not clearly represented in the WNT. All this only appears to strengthen the argument for a separate lemma for in het geweer, replacing the present sense 3. --Lambiam 20:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Done, please review. I was surprised to see that we have no entry for the reflexive verb zich weren, and also no hint of reflexive use at the entry weren. --Lambiam 10:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
