# equal / same (identical) / similar



## ThomasK

Dutch uses one 'root word' for these three. How about your language? 

Dutch : 
- equal = *gelijk *(// alike), meaning in Dutch ('the same' or) 'equal', gelijkwaardig (very specifically meaning 'equal'; something like _(a)like-worthy/dignit.../value_...)
- the same = _*hetzelfde, gelijk                *(_identical =_* identiek, net hetzelfde, *_just the same)*
- *similar *= soortgelijk *(sort-alike), _*gelijkaardig *_(like-natured)


----------



## punctuate

Russian: no.
- equal (they are equal): равны, the singular is равен, and the entire word appears to be a root; the same root is had by the word равнина (the plain, geographical);
- same: no such word, but we use the expressions тот же (I could gloss it as "that still") and такой же ("such still"), with their variations: одно и то же, тот же самый, всё то же, and so on;
- similar: похожий, and there is a verb походить на что-нибудь: be similar to something. Their root is ход, as in the verb ходить (to walk).
Of course, there are also other words, less common, to mean those things. For 'same', it is тождественный (identical, the meaning is pretty much that) and одинаковый (the root seems to be "один", meaning "one").


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> Dutch uses one 'root word' for these three. How about your language?
> 
> Dutch :
> - equal = *gelijk *(// alike), meaning in Dutch ('the same' or) 'equal', gelijkwaardig (very specifically meaning 'equal'; something like _(a)like-worthy/dignit.../value_...)
> - the same = _*hetzelfde, gelijk                *(_identical =_* identiek, net hetzelfde, *_just the same)*
> - *similar *= soortgelijk *(sort-alike), _*gelijkaardig *_(like-natured)



What distinction are you making between the first meaning ("equal") and the second ("the same")? Are you thinking of the difference between,

A)_ We're both wearing the same jacket today. _(= equal, but different individuals)
and
B)_ Here are two photographs are of the same person in different years._ (= the very same individual)


As far as I know, English uses *the same* for both meanings above; I can't think of any widely-used English expression that distinguishes between the two, although it's possible that the archaic word *selfsame* tended to be used for only one of the two meanings.

For your third meaning ("similar"), English uses the adjective/adverb *alike* (as in, _The two of you are really alike_), the preposition *like* (_He's a lot like you_) or, in more formal contexts, the adverb *as* (_He runs much as you do_).


----------



## ThomasK

I am not sure about the use of 'equal' in (A), Gavril, but my 'gelijk' has to do with equality in law, in rights. See the addition *gelijkwaardig*, which is an explanation (explicitation ?) of 'gelijk', as _*'gelijkheid' *(noun) _could be understood as 'identity'. We can say that all people are _gelijkwaardig _but not _gelijk_, equal but not the same, literally then. 

You're right about _alike_, I think, but like is a preposition, and I did not mention that (I forgot: in Dutch *zoals *or *gelijk*, but the latter sounds old).


----------



## ThomasK

punctuate said:


> Russian: no.
> - equal (they are equal): равны, the singular is , and the entire word appears to be a root; the same root is had by the word равнина (the plain, geographical);
> - same: no such word, but we use the expressions тот же (I could gloss it as "that still") and такой же ("such still"), with their variations: одно и то же, тот же самый, всё то же, and so on;
> - similar: похожий, and there is a verb походить на что-нибудь: be similar to something. Their root is ход, as in the verb ходить (to walk).
> Of course, there are also other words, less common, to mean those things. For 'same', it is тождественный (identical, the meaning is pretty much that) and одинаковый (the root seems to be "один", meaning "one").


 Great but a transcription is always interesting._ (I am doing my best to read Russian, but I do not know all signs... Thanks in advance !)_

равен - is there a link with flat (my association with 'plain')? 
такой же - so you see a link between 'the same' and 'still' ? 
похожий - what is the link with walking ? 
тождественный - could you comment on the roots in/ parts of that word?


----------



## arielipi

Hebrew
equal - שווה shaveh or זהה zeheh (the first is more common)
the same/identical - זהה zeheh or חופף khofef (which is more like the same than identical) (used more in geometry really)
similar - דומה domeh


----------



## ThomasK

So both _shaveh _and _zeheh _can refer to rights, to law (equal rights), can they? Which one can be used as (part of) a verb, as in '2 + 2 equals 4'? I suppose _zeheh_, or is it _khofef_?


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> I am not sure about the use of 'equal' in (A),but my 'gelijk' has to do with equality in law, in rights. See the addition _gelijkwaardig_, which is an explanation (explicitation ?) of 'gelijk', as _'gelijkheid' (noun) _could be understood as 'identity'. With us we can say that all people are _gelijkwaardig _but not _gelijk_, equal but not the same, literally then.



OK, if that's what you meant by "equal", then *the same* works for that meaning in English as well (though *equal *is less ambiguous).



> You're right about _alike_, I think, but like is a preposition, and I did not mention that (I forgot: in Dutch *zoals *or *gelijk*, but the latter sounds old).



Not every meaning is guaranteed to translate into the same grammatical category (adjective/preposition/adverb/etc.) in every language. I mentioned *like* because it's probably the closest to the "default" way of expressing similarity in colloquial English.


----------



## ThomasK

Ah, now I see: we would say 'identiek' (identical) when referring to (A). Wouldn't  you? 

I think 'equal' in English often has to do with the law, with waarde (which can be translated in English as 'worth', or 'value') and even waardigheid (dignity). I suppose there is something complex about the concepts that we link in Dutch... I am hoping we can clear this up... 

You might be right about 'like' (etymologically linked with '[ge]lijk' as  a matter of fact), but I had not thought of that. It refers to to similarity indeed.


----------



## arielipi

ThomasK said:


> 1. So both _shaveh _and _zeheh _can refer to rights, to law (equal rights), can they?
> 2. Which one can be used as (part of) a verb, as in '2 + 2 equals 4'? I suppose _zeheh_, or is it _khofef_?


1. both can but שווה shaveh is used more as equality and זהה is used more as identicality/symmetric
2. שווה shaveh. khofef and zeheh are used in geometry.


----------



## ThomasK

2. They all mean the same then??? They are interchangeable?


----------



## arielipi

ThomasK said:


> 2. They all mean the same then??? They are interchangeable?


No. 2 + 2 = 4 two plus two equals four, we use שווה shaveh.
triangle ABC is identical to triangle DEF we use זהה zeheh. (if D = A, E = B, F = C or other permutation) this means that they are really the same triangle. 
triangle ABC is identical to triangle DEF we use חופף khofef. (if AB = DE, BC = EF, CA = FD or other permutation) this means that they are of the same lengths and degrees etc etc.


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> Ah, now I see: we would say 'identiek' (identical) when referring to (A). Wouldn't  you?



It's common to use the word _identical_ in a sentence like A ("We're wearing identical jackets"), but I have also seen people make a more precise distinction between the terms _"equal"_ (= exactly the same in quantity and/or quality) and _"identical"_ (= exactly the same individual). By the latter definitions, the two jackets in my sentence would be considered equal, but not identical.

Is this not the difference you were thinking of when you distinguished between_ gelijk/gelijkwaardig_ and _gelijk/hetzelfde_?


----------



## ThomasK

Oh, oh, this use of 'equal' is new to me, I must say. And somehow the link with quality and quantity might be related with my distinction, but spontaneously I'd say 'gelijkwaardig' is different, refers to rights and dignity. 

 I have been wondering whether we could say _gelijkwaardige kleren _(which could refer to the 'equal' you are referring to), but it does not seem very common. I do see a semantic relation, be it underlying rather...



arielipi said:


> No. 2 + 2 = 4 two plus two equals four, we use שווה shaveh.
> triangle ABC is identical to triangle DEF we use זהה zeheh. (if D = A, E = B, F = C or other permutation) this means that they are really the same triangle.
> triangle ABC is identical to triangle DEF we use חופף khofef. (if AB = DE, BC = EF, CA = FD or other permutation) this means that they are of the same lengths and degrees etc etc.


Good Lord, we are simple minds, so it seems to me now: we see this as _gelijk_, maybe _gelijkwaardig_. I suppose there is a small but logical distinction that we do not generally 'discriminate'...


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> Oh, oh, this use of 'equal' is new to me, I must say. And somehow the link with quality and quantity might be related with my distinction, but spontaneously I'd say 'gelijkwaardig' is different, refers to rights and dignity.



OK, I misunderstood you then. When English-speakers hear the word _equal_, they think of mathematical equality ("two plus two is equal to four") as well as legal equality ("we are all equal before the law"), so I wasn't completely sure what sense you meant it in.


----------



## ThomasK

But thanks for the addition. I thought  I knew a lot of English, but not enough... ;-(   Would you have to change anything regarding your answers then?


----------



## arielipi

I like post #13 because it resembles the way hebrew sees these words; quantity, quality, identity and similarity are different and require definiteness


----------



## ThomasK

Well, to defend my language: we do have _soortgelijk/gelijkaardig, gelijkwaardig, gelijk_, but we sometimes use gelijk in a lot of these cases and assume/ hope people will understand what we mean precisely. ;-)


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> But thanks for the addition. I thought  I knew a lot of English, but not enough... ;-(   Would you have to change anything regarding your answers then?



_gelijk(waardig) = We are all equal/the same in the eyes of the law._
_hetzelfde _= _We are wearing the same jacket / identical jackets._
_soortgelijk_ = _The two of you are very alike / similar _or  _ You are a lot like him._

I might have to revise these again since I don't really know if _hetzelfde_ and _soortgelijk _are used in the Dutch equivalents of these sentences.


----------



## ThomasK

My mistake maybe: it might have been better if I had used them in sentences. *Hetzelfde *= the same, strictly speaking quite the same, _*soortgelijk *_= similar (but not quite the same)...


----------



## apmoy70

In Greek:

Equal: *«Ίσος, -η, -ο»* ['isos] (mas.), ['isi] (fem.), ['iso] (neut.) < Classical adj. *«ἴσος, -ση, -σον» ísŏs* (masc.), *ísē* (fem.), *ísŏn* (neut.) --> _equal in number, strength, size, status_ (with obscure etymology possibly from PIE *ueid-, _to see, know_).

The same: *«Ίδιος, -α, -ο»* ['iðʝ͡os] (masc.), ['iðʝ͡a] (fem.), ['iðʝ͡o] (neut.) < Classical adj. *«ἴδιος, -ίᾱ, -ον» ídiŏs* (masc.), *ĭdíā* (fem.), *ídiŏn* (neut.) --> _one's own, pertaining to oneself, separate, distinct_ (PIE *sue-, _reflexive pronoun_).

*Note:* In Modern Greek *«ίδιος»* ['iðʝ͡os] (after synizesis) means _the same, identical_. *«Ίδιος»* ['iði.os] (without synizesis) retains its ancient meaning. In Modern Greek the phenomenon of semantic shift between two identically spelt words, but pronounced differently (e.g. when one has undergone desyllabification), is very common, for instance: 
*«άδεια»*: 
i/ ['aði.a] (without synizesis) -->  fem. noun sing. nom./acc. _leave of absence, licence_
   ii/ ['aðʝ͡a] (after synizesis) --> fem. sing. nom./acc. of adj. *«άδειος»* ['aðʝ͡os] --> _empty_ 

Similar: *«Όμοιος, -μοια, -μοιο»* ['omi.os] (masc.), ['omi.a] (fem.), ['omi.o] (neut.) < Classical adj. *«ὅμοιος, -μοιος, -μοιον» hómoiŏs* (masc. & fem.), *hómoiŏn* (neut.); also *«ὁμοῖος, -μοῖα, -μοῖον» hŏmoîŏs* (masc.), *hŏmoîa* (fem.), *hŏmoîŏn* (neut); *«ὁμός, 
-μὴ, -μόν» hŏmós* (masc.), *hŏmḕ* (fem.), *hŏmón* (neut.) --> _common, one and the same, equal, similar_ (PIE *som-h₂-o-, _same, equal_


----------



## ancalimon

Modern Turkish:

eş : identical, spouse, wife, husband
eşit : equal
aynı : same
similar: benzer, tıpkı


----------



## ThomasK

apmoy70 said:


> In Greek:
> 
> Equal: *«Ίσος, -η, -ο»* ['isos] (mas.), ['isi] (fem.), ['iso] (neut.) < Classical adj. *«ἴσος, -ση, -σον» ísŏs* (masc.), *ísē* (fem.), *ísŏn* (neut.) --> _equal in number, strength, size, status_ (with obscure etymology possibly from PIE *ueid-, _to see, know_).
> 
> Similar: *«Όμοιος, -μοια, -μοιο»* ['omi.os] (masc.), ['omi.a] (fem.), ['omi.o] (neut.) < Classical adj. *«ὅμοιος, -μοιος, -μοιον» hómoiŏs* (masc. & fem.), *hómoiŏn* (neut.); also *«ὁμοῖος, -μοῖα, -μοῖον» hŏmoîŏs* (masc.), *hŏmoîa* (fem.), *hŏmoîŏn* (neut); *«ὁμός,
> -μὴ, -μόν» hŏmós* (masc.), *hŏmḕ* (fem.), *hŏmón* (neut.) --> _common, one and the same, equal, similar_ (PIE *som-h₂-o-, _same, equal_


The /isos/ meaning probably explains the present meaning of 'equal' in English. And I believe there is something unlogical in h_omeopathy v_s. _homosexual_, the same /homoios/ root but a different form...



ancalimon said:


> Modern Turkish:
> 
> eş : identical, spouse, wife, husband
> eşit : equal
> aynı : same
> similar: benzer, tıpkı


The first one is quite interesting to me. In the best case we 'd we are the other half, but never the same...


----------



## bibax

Czech:

*rovný* (roven) = equal, even, flat; like in "all animals are equal (some are more equal than others)", rovina = plain, plane; rovnice = equation; rovník = equator; *rovnost* = equality, parity (like in "liberté, égalité, fraternité"); 1+1 je rovno = equals 2;

*stejný* < *jednostejný (jeden = one + státi = to stay) = the same but not identical; Petr má stejný vůz jako Pavel = Peter has the same car like Paul (i.e. the same brand and type, they do not share one car);

*shodný* = the same e.g. in shape, colour, quantity (mostly used in mathematics, geometry, etc.); *shodnost* = sameness; shodnost tvarů, shodnost trojúhelníků (of shapes, of triangles);

*podobný* (< podoba = form, shape, image, appearance) = similar; *podobnost* = similarity; podobnost trojúhelníků = similarity of triangles;

*týž, tentýž* (demonstrative pron., cf. Russian *тот же*) = the same, identical; jeden a tentýž = one and the same;
hence the adjective *totožný* = identical, *totožnost* = identity;

There is also *ten samý* (lit. the same), but it is not considered correct, probably a germanism (der selbe). Instead of it we should have to say *tentýž*.


----------



## Frank78

German:

equal: gleich (also mathematically, socially)

the same: *das* gleiche (equal-looking but not the very same item), *das*selbe (the very same item); *the articles* can change according to the gender

This distinction is often only made in upper registers and academic texts.

similar: ähnlich (seldom: gleich) - However the verbs "gleichen" und "ähneln" (be akin to) are both used frequently.


----------



## punctuate

bibax said:


> Czech:
> 
> *rovný* (roven) = equal, even, flat;


In Russian, *равный* talks only for equality (in the sense, no greater and no lesser, in all variations of the meaning), but not for flatness, "flat" is a feature of shape not of any quantity (like altitude above the sea level) and is named *ровный*.


----------



## mataripis

ThomasK said:


> Dutch uses one 'root word' for these three. How about your language?
> 
> Dutch :
> - equal = *gelijk *(// alike), meaning in Dutch ('the same' or) 'equal', gelijkwaardig (very specifically meaning 'equal'; something like _(a)like-worthy/dignit.../value_...)
> - the same = _*hetzelfde, gelijk                *(_identical =_* identiek, net hetzelfde, *_just the same)*
> - *similar *= soortgelijk *(sort-alike), _*gelijkaardig *_(like-natured)


[Tagalog]  1.) Equal- Pantay/patas   2.) Same- gayon din     3.) Similar- magkatulad/ maihahalintulad


----------



## ThomasK

So no link at all, I guess. Does the root of one of those words refer to 'to resemble'?


----------



## arielipi

ThomasK said:


> So no link at all, I guess. Does the root of one of those words refer to 'to resemble'?


In hebrew דומה domeh is also resemble, as well as משקף meshakef root sh-k-f which is used for 'clear' (-color), 'reveal' and other words regarding seeing things as they are.


----------



## AutumnOwl

*Swedish:*
equal - _jämlike_ (there are also the word _gelike_, usually used as a plural: _gelikar - han och hans gelikar_ = he and his equals)
the same -_ lika, samma_
similar - _likadan, liknande_
alike/likewise - _likaledes_
alike -_ likna; hon liknar sin mor_ - she looks like her mother

There are several Swedish words beginning with _lika-/lik-_ that means that something is similar/alike (not to confuse with _lik _- corpse; _likbil_ = hearse, and not a similar car ;.) )
_Likalydande_ _- (-lydande = sounding)_
_Likafullt_ - nontheless(?)
_Likartad_ - of the same kind (-art = kind)
_Likriktning_ - the same direction
_Likasinnad_ - of the same mind/of the same opinion
_Likstor_ - something that is the same size
_Likaså_ - also
_Liktydig_ - something that means the same
_Likaväl_ - likewise
_Likvärd/likvärdig_ - of the same value


----------



## ThomasK

All the _lik_-words seem to be either adj. or adv., except for _liktydig _(what is _tyd/ig _here please ?). Is that correct?


----------



## porkkanaraaste

Finnish:


equal: _samanlainen _(_sama _'same'), _yhtäläinen _(_yksi _'one'), and in compound words: _saman_- ('same'), _tasa_- ('even'), _yhden_- ('one')


the same: _sama _(loan from a Germanic language)


similar: _samankaltainen _(_kaltainen _'-like'), _vastaava_, _vastaavanlainen _(_vastata _'to answer, respond; correspond')


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> Great but a transcription is always interesting._ (I am doing my best to read Russian, but I do not know all signs... Thanks in advance !)_


Here it is, written in the IPA. Russian orthography is not phonemic anyway, let alone great differences in pronunciation of the same phonemes in different positions. It's the standard Moscow pronunciation; dental [t̪] and [d̪] are shown as just [t] and [d] (Russian has not normal alveolar [t] and [d] anyway); some outdated symbols are possible; some vowel glides (diphtongoids) existing in stressed positions are traditionally shown as solid vowels; positional velarization is not shown, except in case of [ɫ]; "sh" and "zh" are traditionally shown as retroflex, although they're in fact just back post-alveolar, at least in most positions.
"равны" [rɐv'nɨ]  ("equal", short pl.);  "равен" ['ravʲɪn] ("equal", short sg. m.); "равнина" [rɐv'nʲinə] ("the plain", geographical); *
"тот же" ['todʐᵻ], "такой же" [tɐ'kojʐᵻ], "одно и то же" [ɐd'no ɪ 'toʐᵻ], "тот же самый" ['todʐᵻ 'samᵻj], "всё то же" ['fsʲo 'toʐᵻ];
"похожий" [pɐ'xoʐᵻj]; "походить на что-нибудь" [pəxɐ'dᶻʲitˢʲ nɐ'ʂtonʲɪbʊtˢʲ] ("be similar to something"); -ход- /-xod-/, "ходить" [xɐ'dᶻʲitˢʲ] (to walk).
"тождественный" [tɐʐ'dᶻʲestvʲɪn)ᵻj] ("identical"), "одинаковый" [ədᶻʲɪ'nakəvᵻj]; "один" [ɐ'dᶻʲin] ("one").

*- I must also note the interference between two similar roots here: -rovn-/-ravn- of Old Russian origin, and -ravn- of Church Slavonic origin. Although their semantics is really close (and they share the same proto-Slavic origin), the primary meaning of the first became "flat", "even", "not rough" (about a surface, mostly), while the primary meaning of the second one became "equal". It answers one of your other questions as well.  Also see here.


ThomasK said:


> такой же - so you see a link between 'the same' and 'still' ?


Russian "же" (zhe, [ʐᵻ] - always unstressed) is just an emphatic particle which is difficult to translate into Germanic languages; Eng. "still" / Germ. "doch" are just the closest analogues. The actual connection here is between "the same" and "such". 


ThomasK said:


> похожий - what is the link with walking ?


Exactly through the verb "походить" - to be similar to smth. (actually, there is a homonymous verb "походить" (2), meaning "to walk a bit"). The very semantic link is dead, only the experts could probably explain it. In Old Russian the original verb had different (and also sometimes surprising) meanings, including "to seize", "to walk around" and "to reside".


ThomasK said:


> тождественный - could you comment on the roots in/ parts of that word?


Without looking into dictionaries I can just tell it has the same etymological root as "тоже" ['toʐᵻ] ("also", "as well", "too"; "either"), which is, in fact, just "то" ([to], "that" sg. neut.) + "же" (the emphatic particle we've just discussed above). "Zhd" instead of "zh" is a typical marker of Church Slavonic loanwords. The word also has the suffixe -ств- (which forms nouns), and the morphemic combination -енный, which marks it then as a derived adjective (masculine singular, to be precise).
P.S.: Vasmer's dictionary tells that the source noun (тождество ['toʐdᶻʲɪstvə] - "identity") is formed directly from "то же" (= Ch.Slav. "то жде") and is, in fact, just a calque from Latin "identitās" (cf. Lat.  idem).


----------



## ThomasK

Finnish: strange that Finnish borrows such a 'functional' word, I'd think, but maybe it is not that special... 

Russian: thanks for the interesting information - and you can give a really broad transcription, you know, Awwal, some general idea of how to read it... Thanks!


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> strange that Finnish borrows such a 'functional' word


"Equal" itself is a loanword from Latin, and "same" is supposed to have Norse roots, so... I wouldn't be really surprised.


----------



## ThomasK

I am not sure I understand: I thought it would be more common to borrow specific words. Do you mean that the fact that English has borrowed 'equal' from French/ Latin, shows that more languages borrow such important words? (Sorry)


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> I am not sure I understand: I thought it would be more common to borrow specific words. Do you mean that the fact that English has borrowed 'equal' from French/ Latin, shows that more languages borrow such important words? (Sorry)


Borrowings just happen, and it's not necessary some cultural or very abstract terms. Many languages have loaned conjunctions, suffixes, even pretty simple verbs like "to love" or "to come by" from other ones. Of course, it requires definite circumstances, but it happens.


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> I am not sure I understand: I thought it would  be more common to borrow specific words. Do you mean that the fact that  English has borrowed 'equal' from French/ Latin, shows that more  languages borrow such important words? (Sorry)



Another thing to mention (besides what Awwal12 wrote) is that the  concept of "same" doesn't have to be conveyed with a single word/phrase in all contexts.

For example, instead of saying "X and Y are the same"_,_ you could simply say, "X is Y". Or, instead of saying "I ordered the same thing he did", you can say "I also ordered it" (right after mentioning what the other person ordered). These are just examples from English.

So,  if a language expresses the concept of  "sameness" differently in different contexts, but it is then influenced (perhaps through  the frequent calquing of phrases) by another language with a different  mapping of this meaning, this asymmetry could lead the first language to  adopt the second language's word/phrase for "same".


----------



## ThomasK

Mmm, quite interesting. I'll have to look into this idea of 'mapping of meaning', which seems new to me (at least as an expression). 

I quite agree with the basics of your reasoning, do wonder whether this is quite the same concept. I do recognize the (interesting) link. _(Just by the way: have you ever seen these conceptual links exploited didactically? I know of onomasiology as opposed to semasiology [more well-known as a method], but any information about this idea of 'naming' (mapping ?) a concept is quite welcome)_


----------



## Gavril

ThomasK said:


> Mmm, quite interesting. I'll have to look into this idea of 'mapping of meaning', which seems new to me (at least as an expression).



For example, some languages have a single word for "water", whereas certain other languages (so I've read) have many words for different types of water (warm or cold water, various bodies of water, etc.). This is what I mean by "different mappings of meaning".



> I quite agree with the basics of your reasoning, do wonder whether this is quite the same concept.



I'm not quite following. The same concept as what?


----------



## ThomasK

Gavril said:


> For example, some languages have a single word for "water", whereas certain other languages (so I've read) have many words for different types of water (warm or cold water, various bodies of water, etc.). This is what I mean by "different mappings of meaning".
> 
> I'm not quite following. The same concept as what?


Thanks for the explanation!

What I meant is something you hinted at in #3: 'the same' is not always 'quite the same'. I love generalisations, the way I loved Chomskyan 'deep structures', but then had to admit that surface transformations can create a change of meaning... That is what I was reminded of. I think broad concepts are quite useful, but... ;-)


----------



## apmoy70

ThomasK said:


> ...And I believe there is something unlogical in h_omeopathy v_s. _homosexual_, the same /homoios/ root but a different form...


Au contraire my dear Thomas, precision in the Greek language is one of its main characteristics, and the pattern it follows to construct words is quite logical:
- The prefixes *«ὁμο-» hŏmŏ-* and *«ὁμό-» hŏmó-* are used to denote (i) an action performed simultaneously or in conjunction with another e.g. *«ὁμοβροντία»* [omovron'di.a] (fem.) (constr. 1897) --> _barrage_; (ii) similarity, unity, sameness, e.g. *«ὁμόγνιος» hŏmógniŏs* (masc. adj.) --> _of the same ancestry_, *«ὁμόφρων» hŏmópʰrōn* (masc. & fem. adj.) --> _like-minded_, *«ὁμοφωνία» hŏmŏpʰōníā* (fem.) --> _unanimity_; the modern hybrid constructions _homo_sexuality and _homo_sexual fall into this category. 

-The prefixes *«ὁμοιο- hŏmoiŏ-* and *«ὁμοιό-» hŏmoió-* are used to denote _comparisson_ or _relation_ e.g. *«ὁμοιογενής» hŏmoiŏgĕnḗs* (mas. & fem. adj.) --> _akin, of like kind_, *«ὁμοιοπαθής» hŏmoiŏpatʰḗs* (mas. & fem. adj.) --> _having like feelings or passions, affected in the same way_ (whence homeopathy), Fr. homéothermie, homéostasie.
Hope this makes sense.


----------



## Outsider

In Portuguese all these words go back to Latin:

*equal = igual *(these are cognates)
*similar = semelhante *(a cognate of "simile"), *parecido* (a cognate of "appear")
*same = mesmo*. This is probably the most interesting one. It's a cognate of Spanish *mismo*, about which the DRAE says:Del lat. vulg. 
_*metipsĭmus_, combinación del elemento enfático _-met, _que se añadía 
a los prons. pers., y un sup. 
de _ipse_, el mismo​


----------



## Словеса

Awwal12 said:


> Russian "же" (zhe, [ʐᵻ] - always unstressed) is just an emphatic particle which is difficult to translate into Germanic languages; Eng. "still" / Germ. "doch" are just the closest analogues. The actual connection here is between "the same" and "such".


"Just an emphatic particle" is, I think, a simplification. The most typical use of it seems to me in sentences like "я же сказал" or "ты же сделал", where it refers to the idea of a statement that I seem to know it is already known, but I want to ascertain it. I.e., a reduplication of a known truth. I think, this meaning fits into the word combination тот же as well, referring to the "reduplication" of the thing, to the idea of a second reference to it, but without expressing a will to ascertain anything. When there are so many "emphatic particles", "emphatic particle" is no more a good description even for this reason alone: descriptions for different things must differ. This is not to mention that emphasis alone is not a basis for making decisions, while particles like же obviously change thoughts and decisions of people who hear them in comparison with sentences that would omit the particle.


> "Zhd" instead of "zh" is a typical marker of Church Slavonic loanwords.


I have met the word тожественный as well.


----------



## Словеса

ThomasK said:


> равен - is there a link with flat (my association with 'plain')?


Flat (adjective) is ровный. It refers to the shape. The lands in the plains are not flat (they are not asphalted pavements, not even anything close to that), but they have approximately the equal altitude above the sea level; thus, равный (equal, adj) and равнина (plain, noun) have the same root, but ровный (flat, adj) has a different root.


----------



## Awwal12

Словеса said:


> Flat (adjective) is ровный. It refers to the shape. The lands in the plains are not flat (they are not asphalted pavements, not even anything close to that), but they have approximately the equal altitude above the sea level; thus, равный (equal, adj) and равнина (plain, noun) have the same root, but ровный (flat, adj) has a different root.


Etymologically, though, the root is the same (PSl. *оrvo-).
Also there is no full distinction between the meanings of -rovn- and -ravn-; cf. ровня. And in the colloquial language they tend to merge*, especially thanks to the ancient vowel interchage in the root -rovn- itself, making the roots completely indistinguishable in some positions anyway (so, Perf. подровнять > Imp. подравнивать < Perf. подравнять).
*in unstressed positions, due to the Standard Russian "akanye"


----------



## Словеса

Thanks, really interesting.


Awwal12 said:


> making the roots completely indistinguishable in some positions anyway (so, Perf. подровнять > Imp. подравнивать < Perf. подравнять).


Maybe not as indistinguishable, as подровненный is a real participle, for example, while подравненный looks dubious to me. Google agrees, giving 3460 vs. 294.


----------



## AutumnOwl

ThomasK said:


> All the _lik_-words seem to be either adj. or adv., except for _liktydig _(what is _tyd/ig _here please ?). Is that correct?


_Liktydig_ is also an adjective, the noun is _liktydighet_._ -tydig_ has to do with _tyda_ which means to interpret something. There are nouns with _lika-/lik-_, for example _likalön_ (equal pay), _likabehandling_ (equal treatment), _likaberättigande_ (equal justification),_ likavärde_ (equal value),but these are "newer" words and have more to do with equal rights than that things are similar/the same.


----------



## Dymn

*Spanish*:

*equal*:

_igual_
It is much more common than "equal" in English (certainly more than only having to do with justice and mathematics), so this is just a broad translation. For example, in the other thread "men are all the same": _todos los hombres son iguales_.*
Secondary meanings: "maybe"
Collocations: _dar igual _(lit. "to give equal") - "to not matter"; _ser igual _(lit. "to be equal") - "to not matter, to equal"; _¡al igual! _- "really?!" (teen slang)
Derivations: _igualdad - "_equality, equation" (though _ecuación_ is more common in the latter sense); _igualar _- "to make equal"

*same*:

_mismo_
Derivations: _mismísimo _(_-ísimo: _"very") - "very same" (as in "the very same guy")

*similar*:

_parecido _(participle of _parecer _"to seem, to look like")
Secondary meanings: "resemblance, lookalike"

_similar _(_símil _"similar" + _-ar_, redundant adjectival suffix)

_semejante _(_semejar _"to resemble" + _-ante _"-ing")
Secondary meanings: "such" (formal; e.g. _semejante memez _"such twaddle")

* I don't know exactly where the semantic border is between _mismo _and _igual. _I am however intrigued by Gavril's post, and I wonder whether any language makes a systematic distinction between these two concepts ("very same thing" vs. "same in characteristics only").

I feel the same distinction could map quite symmetrically to "other" and "different".



Gavril said:


> A)_ We're both wearing the same jacket today. _(= equal, but different individuals)
> and
> B)_ Here are two photographs are of the same person in different years._ (= the very same individual)


----------



## Sardokan1.0

Sardinian : 

*equal* :

_pretzìsu_ - From Latin _"praecisus" _= corresponding

_que pare_ (singular) - _que pares_ (plural) - From Latin "_par - paris"_ = equivalent

example : 

_Cussas duas domos sun pretzìsas = those two houses are equal
Cussas duas domos sun que pares = those two houses are equal
Cussa domo este que pare / pretzìsa a sa nostra = that house is equal to ours _

*same, anyway :*

_su matessi_ - Latin _"metipsimus"_ abbreviation of _"semetipsimus"_ = the same

example : 

_Este sa matessi cosa = It's the same thing
No bi àndes! Bi ando su matessi = Don't go there! I go anyway_

*to be similar, to seem, to look like:*

_pàrrere _- Latin _"parere" _= to appear

_assimizare, assimilare_ - Latin _"ad similare"_ = to imitate

example :
_
Mi pàret de hàer intesu tronende = Literally. It seems to me to have heard thundering
Cuss'homine mi pàret unu pagu maccu = Lit. That man seems to me a bit mad
Frade meu s'assimìzat a mie = Lit. My brother looks like to me_


----------



## Nawaq

*French*, similar to other Romance languages, as usual :

equal,"_égal_", used in mathematics "_deux plus deux égale quatre_", also used to mean "to have the same quantity, same quality (as everyone else), as in "_les hommes naissent libres et égaux en droits_". I have no idea how to write this properly, someone might correct me later.

the same, "_le/la même_"

similar, "_similaire_"

also, "_pareil_","_identique_", "_semblable_", "_ressemblant_"... I know I am just putting words out there and not giving anything else but I can't seem to find my words so...


----------

