# Foot vs leg



## djwebb1969

If you are seeing the doctor and using the word нога, which means "leg/foot", how would you be clear the pain was in the your foot and not your leg? Would you say something like "the lower part of нога"?


----------



## ahvalj

No, I never remember when to use _foot/leg_ or _hand/arm_: this exists in my brain passively as something learnt but not at the moment I am writing or speaking. There are specialized names for parts of these organs, like _стопа, голень, колено_ etc., but they are not as generalized as _foot/leg_. The word for the entire appendage is _нога_. Actually, English preserves here the Indo-European distinction, but Balto-Slavic lost it early in its history.

Update. So, if I have to explain where I feel pain, I will either use _the lower part of нога _or the precise word for this part. Actually, I am even not sure where the foot ends and the leg begins in English.


----------



## Evgeniy

djwebb1969 said:


> If you are seeing the doctor and using the word нога, which means "leg/foot", how would you be clear the pain was in the your foot and not your leg? Would you say something like "the lower part of нога"?


We can: ступня. But we don't have to. Ступня is a part of нога.


----------



## Evgeniy

ahvalj said:


> Actually, I am even not sure where the foot ends and the leg begins in English.


See here. Then, change the query to get the definition of 'ankle'. If you don't know this latter word as of yet, of course; I did not.


----------



## ahvalj

Some more linguistic information. Slavic possesses a word etymologically related to the English _arm_ but it is used for the shoulder: e. g. Polish _ramię_ and Slovenian _ramo_. The word related to _foot_ is lost in Slavic, but in Baltic it means "the lower part of the foot" (or "the trace"): Lithuanian _pėda,_ Latvian _pēda_. _Leg_ and _hand_ are Germanic words of disputable etymology.

Update. I was actually wrong about the relatives of _foot_ in Slavic: of course, it survives in the words _пехота_ and _пеший_.


----------



## ahvalj

Evgeniy said:


> See here. Then, change the query to get the definition of 'ankle'. If you don't know this latter word as of yet, of course; I did not.


To my surprise, the _foot_ is actually smaller than I expected ,-) It more or less corresponds then to the abovementioned Baltic _pėda/__pēda,_ but in Baltic, like in Slavic, this part is not used in a general sense: for example _on one's *legs*_ will be _на своих *ногах*_ in Russian and _ant savo *kojų*_ in Lithuanian, but _to stand on *feet*_ also corresponds to _стоять на *ногах*_ in Russian and _stovėti ant *kojų*_ in Lithuanian.


----------



## Evgeniy

ahvalj said:
			
		

> To my surprise, the _foot_ is actually smaller than I expected ,-)


Well, it has a different function than all the rest of noga. So, it earned a special word. ;-)


----------



## djwebb1969

Well, as was previously discussed in this forum (http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1071663) noga is related to the English word "nail"!!!! (as in "toe-nail")


----------



## ahvalj

djwebb1969 said:


> Well, as was previously discussed in this forum (http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1071663) noga is related to the English word "nail"!!!! (as in "toe-nail")


That's true, and in Lithuanian _naga_ still means "hoof".


----------



## igusarov

djwebb1969 said:


> If you are seeing the doctor and using the  word нога, which means "leg/foot", how would you be clear the pain was  in the your foot and not your leg? Would you say something like "the  lower part of нога"?


If there is a common well-known name for  that part of leg - we would use it. Otherwise - yes, we would have to  describe it somehow...

I think you can look up these common names in any dictionary:
Подошва, ступня (стопа), пятка, щиколотка (лодыжка), голень, икра, колено, бедро (ляжка).


----------



## Evgeniy

igusarov said:


> If there is a common well-known name for  that part of leg


A foot is _not_ a part of a leg, that is why I had to 'borrow' the word noga in English… or am I mistaken?


----------



## Evgeniy

igusarov said:


> Otherwise - yes, we would have to  describe it somehow...


That's not a problem, I believe. "Доктор, у меня ступня болит", or, if you want to specify it's not "подошва", "у меня верхняя часть ступни болит". The word ступня, unlike стопа, is a conversational word, not a special designation for a well-defined part of the foot, and as such it is a very close equivalent for the word 'foot'. […]


----------



## Evgeniy

Evgeniy said:


> The word ступня, unlike стопа, is a conversational word, not a special designation for a well-defined part of the foot


 By the way. It appears that стопа is an exact equivalent of foot as well.


----------



## ahvalj

Evgeniy said:


> By the way. It appears that стопа is an exact equivalent of foot as well.


The difference is in the status: in Germanic, the foot is a separate part of the body, whereas in Balto-Slavic it is an optional part of the leg.


----------



## Evgeniy

ahvalj said:


> The difference is in the status: in Germanic, the foot is a separate part of the body, whereas in Balto-Slavic it is an optional part of the leg.


Well, in English the foot is not only a separate part of the body, but also a part of the leg, as the Wikipedia article for the human leg I was pointed to by a PM explicitly writes. Somehow, the two conceptions do not contradict each other and coexist.


----------



## Linguoman

As it was stated, the Russian word for "foot" is "ступня" or "стопа". They both mean the same, but "ступня" is more colloquial.

BTW, can anyone confirm if "стопа" is of the same Indo-European root as the English "step"? I guess it is.

However, I have to admit we only use "ступня" or "стопа" when we want to emphasize that this specific part of the leg is meant. Generally, when it is clear from the context which part of leg is meant, we just use "нога" without specifying this part.

E.g., we say "размер ноги" (and almost never "размер ступни") when speaking of one's size of foot (to buy shoes etc.).
Then, we say "стоять на ногах" (and never "стоять на ступнях") meaning "to stand on one's feet".
Similarly, "ударить по мячу ногой" (to kick a ball with one's foot); "смотреть под ноги" (to watch one's step, lit. "to look under one's feet") etc.

As to using "ступня", the most common case which comes to my mind is visiting a doctor, when you need to specify exactly which part of the leg hurts. But we can still use "нога" even in this case. I can well imagine a dialogue:
- Доктор, у меня нога болит.
- Где?
- (And then you show a point on your foot).

Another example is "массаж ступней" (foot massage), which is a specific kind of massage for this specific part of body only.

Sometimes, you can also hear the expression "ступни ног". Although it is logically redundant, it is quite acceptable. But in English you would never say "feet of one's legs", would you?


----------



## ahvalj

Linguoman said:


> BTW, can anyone confirm if "стопа" is of the same Indo-European root as the English "step"? I guess it is.


Yes: 
http://enc-dic.com/fasmer/Stopa-12859.html
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=step

The Germanic -_p_- almost always causes problems since it can result from either _pn_, _bn_ or _bʰn _(_b_ that would have normally produced _p_ in Germanic was an extremely rare sound in Indo-European).


----------



## Evgeniy

Linguoman said:


> Sometimes, you can also hear the expression "ступни ног". Although it is logically redundant, it is quite acceptable.


I think it is neither illogical nor redundant, though it makes no difference for all external logic. It helps locate ступни as we're talking of them; that's probably an illustration of ahvalj's point in #14.


----------

