# To protect



## ThomasK

The safe thread reminds me of protecting. What is (are) your word(s) for that - as in: _the parent protected their children from..._ ?

In Latin, or etymologically, it must be something like *'to cover* (tegere) *in front* (pro)'. That explains the English _protect_, French _protéger_, etc.  

In Dutch it would be *'beschermen'*, containing 'scherm', screen, and be-, from above, so something like screening from above...


----------



## apmoy70

In Greek the v. is *«προστατεύω»* [prostaˈtevo] < Classical v. *«προστατεύω» prŏstăteúō* with primary meanings _to be leader_ or _rule over, to have authority_, and secondary, _to protect, be guardian_; in MoGr the v. is solely _to protect_. It's a compound: prefix, preposition, and adverb *«πρό» prό* --> _forth, forward, before, for_ (PIE *pro- _forward_ cf Hit. parā, _forward_; Skt. प्र (pra), _forth, forward_; Av. fra-, Lat. pro-, Lith. pra-, Proto-Slavic *pro) + Classical 3rd declension fem. noun *«στάσις» stásis* --> _standing, standing still, stand, location, position, political opinion, party, division, placement, weighing, defrayal_ (PIE *sth₂-ti- _stand, position_ cf Skt. स्थिति (sthiti), _position_; Av. stāiti; Lat. statiō; Proto-Germanic *stadiz).
In MoGr protector/guardian is *«προστάτης, -τρια»* [proˈstatis] (masc.), [proˈstatri.a] (fem.) < Classical masc. only *«προστάτης» prŏstátēs* --> lit. _leader, chief_, later, _one who stands before and protects, guardian_ > Eng. prostate (medic.).
The noun is *«προστασία»* [prostaˈsi.a] --> _protection, patronage_ < Classical fem. noun *«προστασίᾱ» prŏstăsíā* --> lit. _standing in front_, later, _protection, patronage_.


----------



## ThomasK

apmoy70 said:


> In Greek the v. is *«προστατεύω»* [prostaˈtevo] < Classical v. *«προστατεύω» prŏstăteúō* with primary meanings _to be leader_ or _rule over, to have authority_, and secondary, _to protect, be guardian_; in MoGr the v. is solely _to protect_. (..)


I am always intrigued by how intransitive verbs such as 'stand' can be turned into transitive ones, like here, but we know the same phenomenon.


----------



## Armas

Finnish

-suojella < suoja = shelter, covering, protection (possibly from an Iranian language, cf. Persian sāya = shadow, shelter)
-varjella, most likely related to varjo = shadow


----------



## 810senior

Japanese
- *mamor-u*: ma(eye) + mor-u(to guard)


----------



## ger4

German: *schützen, beschützen*
_
Die Eltern (be)schützten ihre Kinder vor ...
The parents protected their children from ..._

schützen (modern German)
schütten (Middle Low German) - to protect, to block, to obstruct
*skutjan (West Germanic)
scyttan (Old English) - to block, to lock (with a bolt)
to shut (modern English)
(Sources: DWDS, etymomline)


----------



## ThomasK

The Latin root is common in Romanic languages, I believe, such as French, Italian, Spanish.

IN Russian I found the word защищат, but I have not found a way to analyse it...


----------



## ger4

As far as I understand, here it says that _защищать/zashchishchat'_ (perfective aspect: _защитить/zashchitit'_) is derived from _щит/shchit_ ('shield') which seems to have the same root as Latin _scūtum_.

Edit: _Scūtum, from Proto-Indo-European*skei- (“to cut, split”), which is an extension of Proto-Indo-European*sek- (“to cut”).  Related to Ancient Greek σκῦτος (skûtos). _Source:_ Wiktionary
_
Edit (2): I forgot the ь in _защищать_


----------



## ThomasK

That might be quite right, thanks - and it is very interesting ! I hope some other speakers of Slavic languages will be bringing in their translation as well.



Holger2014 said:


> German: *schützen, beschützen*


At least Norwegian has a similar translation: _beskytte -_ or so it seems,_ at least. _Swedish has a shortened form:_ skytta. _


----------



## perpend

The thing is that you can protect your children in different ways.

You could protect them from a storm.
You could protect them from evil.
You could protect them from the sun.

I guess in American English, I'd use: to keep someone away from something


----------



## ThomasK

That is interesting, but I am surprised. I mean: if you were to drop the 'from' object, I suppose you'd use 'protect', wouldn't you? Or maybe 'safeguard' (perhaps not for children, and people...)?


----------



## perpend

Is the "protection" in the eye of the parent or the child?


----------



## ThomasK

Er, in the eye of the parent: his/ her intention is to ... the children. How can I interpret 'to protect' otherwise? (I might have a narrow view of the concept - help!)


----------



## perpend

I don't know, but you wanted to drop the "'from object'" (#12), so I am confused.

EDIT: In the meantime, maybe "to harbor one's children" is a happy medium.


----------



## AutumnOwl

ThomasK said:


> Swedish has a shortened form:_ skytta skydda._


Swedish have both _skydda_ and _beskydda_, both means (to) protect, but in different ways. It's difficult to explain, but I'll make a try.

_Skydda barnet från solen_ - protect the child from the sun
_Rädda barnens mål är att beskydda barn_ ... - The goal of Save the Children are to protect children...
_Kvinnan hade skyddat boende_ - the woman had protected housing
_Kungen är beskyddare för Världsnaturfonden_ - the king is protector of World Wildlife Fund

_Skydda_ is usually used for "hands on" protection, while _beskydda_ is more of abstract protection.


----------



## ThomasK

I am sorry, I thought I remembered... I think I can see the difference between the two: almost lit. and fig. meaning.

I am still amazed at the confusion that I seem to cause with the English word 'protect'd. @perpend: I just meant something general like guaranteeing a child's safety. I do understand the idea of keeping away from [all kinds of things] and harboring, but somehow those don't seem to be the most general words, I think - and therefore I thought 'to protect' would be best...


----------



## ger4

AutumnOwl said:


> _Skydda_ is usually used for "hands on" protection, while _beskydda_ is more of abstract protection.


I was just wondering how to define the difference between the German verbs _schützen_ and _beschützen..._ perhaps it's quite similar in both languages: German _beschützen_ also sounds more abstract than _schützen_:
_- Die Eltern beschützen ihre Kinder_ - the parents protect* their children (in general; no specific danger mentioned)
_- Sie schützen ihre Kinder vor der Sonne_ - they protect** their children from the sun

* = harbor ?
** = keep away from ?


----------



## ThomasK

I had never really thought of that distinction, mainly because we don't have it - or maybe we do: _beschutten_ vs. _beschermen_. _Beschutten_ implies offering fig. screens, I think, is not that literal as _beschermen_.


----------



## apmoy70

There's a similar subtle distinction in Greek between *«προστατεύω»* (see my previous post) and *«προφυλάσσω»* [profiˈlaso] --> _to watch over, protect_ < denominative verb from the noun *«φύλαξ» pʰúlak͡s* (masc.) --> _guard, watcher, protector_ (with obscure etymology) > Eng. _prophylactic_. The latter implies (as ThomasK put it) 





> offering fig. screens


----------



## igusarov

ThomasK said:


> IN Russian I found the word защищат, but I have not found a way to analyse it...


Indeed, it is "защищать" (za-schee-schA-t'). Literally it could be explained as a verb derived from the state of being "за щитом", i.e. "behind a shield". I think it is constructed in the same way as the verb "to beshield" in English.

This word is generic. It can be used in the context "parents always protect their children" in the most wide sense, which implies "from any harm which may come their way".
However, this generic word may not be the best choice if you want to be specific about the nature of harm. In other words, in the sentence "parents protected their children from X" the most natural choice of verb may vary depending on what exactly X is.

A few possible verbs:
"Защищать" is what you do if someone attacked the child (i.e. from direct physical harm). The harm is already on the way, and the child need your active help to overcome it.
"Защищать" is what you do if someone told you the child did something wrong, but you stand the ground of the child (i.e. to advocate, to stand up for).
"О*гражд*ать" is what you do to _prevent_ bad influence coming to the child (like alcohol, drugs, criminal neighborhood). This verb could roughly be explained as "to *fence* around". It has a connotation of "to insulate, to prevent contact with the source of harm".
"*Береч*ь", "О*берег*ать" is what you do to prevent the child from catching some disease, from making unwise decisions (like inserting an iron nail into the power supply). The connotation is "to *keep* safe", "do not let the child experience that thing".

Imperative sentence "Protect children from the sun" would use "защитите" in Russian.


----------



## ThomasK

It is interesting to see that perhaps the concept ought to be looked at from a broader viewpoint (generic vs. specific, as you say). But every contributor probably starts from his/ her own viewpoint, based on one's own language...


----------



## Panceltic

In Slovene, the verb is parallel to Russian: *ščititi* (impf.), *zaščititi* (pf.)


----------



## mataripis

Tagalog: To protect- ingatan (keep safe), Spanish origin; protektahan.


----------



## ThomasK

Do you really mean that 'ingatan' can be analysed into to keep+ safe? I had a look at Google T and there the word is supposed to mean 'keep' whereas 'tp keep safe' would be:_ panatilihing ligtas ang_. It may be quite wrong, I am just asking...


----------



## mataripis

Yes it has two meanings. Ingat is be careful and ingatan can be take care of him or her but panatilihin siyang ligtas is another clear translation. Protect him from evil- Ingatan mo siya sa masasama..protect- is also keep him/her safe. The possibility for this another translation- Panatilihin silang ligtas sa masasamang loob . Is a clear proof.


----------

