# dějiny, historie



## Kwunlam

_Dobrý den ! _

May I ask if "Dějiny" and "Historie" just mean the same, just that one has a Czech origin and the other a Latin origin, or they have some slight difference in meaning ? 

Dekuji vam !


----------



## kusurija

Yes, it is so, as You wrote - the same. Only "historie" may sometime have 2-nd sense as story or romething, what is needed widely explain. But in this sense it is used rather less. 
E.g.: To je dlouhá historie - this is rather long thing to explain...


----------



## Jana337

Besides, "dějiny" can't be used in IT (history of edits in Wikipedia) or in finance (credit history).


----------



## Kwunlam

Thank you very much ! Your explanations allow me to grasp the smaller difference in usage of the two words.

May I ask also how would you render the word "historiography" ? Do you just call it "historiographie", or is there also a Czech equivalence ?


----------



## Jana337

We call it "historiografie". The Czech equivalent "dějepisectví" is not very common.

Note that history classes, in particular at elementary schools, are called "dějepis". But a course called "history of xxx" would be "dějiny xxx", e.g. "dějiny výtvarného umění", "dějiny ženského hnutí" apod.


----------



## Kwunlam

Jana337 said:


> We call it "historiografie". The Czech equivalent "dějepisectví" is not very common.
> 
> Note that history classes, in particular at elementary schools, are called "dějepis". But a course called "history of xxx" would be "dějiny xxx", e.g. "dějiny výtvarného umění", "dějiny ženského hnutí" apod.



Thank you once again for your clarifications. I would try to take note of and understand these expressions.


----------



## winpoj

Intuitively I'd agree with Jana but, to my own surprise, there is around 31,000 instances of "dějepisectví" on Czech websites. That is quite a lot.


----------



## ytre

Personal preference. Recently because of integration and ease of course selection I would expect the course name to become more often historiografie while description showing the dějepisectví. Like is.muni.cz/predmety/predmet.pl?kod=HIDH;fakulta=1421;obdobi=  But is it only personal preference or something different? is.muni.cz/predmety/predmet.pl?kod=HIA113;fakulta=1421;obdobi=


----------



## werrr

I would say that “dějiny” is used for the events in the course of all time, while “historie” only for the past events.


----------



## Jana337

werrr said:


> I would say that “dějiny” is used for the events in the course of all time, while “historie” only for the past events.


Hm. Could you write down some examples, please?


----------



## Norzog

I am gonna try to clarify it once again and give some examples so you could get a better grasp of the difference.

First of all, both terms 'Historie' and 'Dějiny' are practically identical in the meaning and you can interchange the words in the sentence without changing its meaning.

But, the term 'Historie' is far more universal, than the other word. You can use it, as far as I know, anywhere, when you're wondering which word of those two you should use.

Anyways, there are still times, when you would rather want to use the term 'Dějiny' instead of 'Historie', such as when refering to something with and educational purpose (lessons, books, documentary materials etc.) 
e.g. - _'History of War (Dějny válečniství/války)','History of football (Dějiny fotbalu)'._
- or when refering to a history of a country - _'History of China (Dějiny Číny)'_

When speaking about history of a certain thing, for example history of old gun, you inherited from your grandfather, you use term 'Historie' _(This old pump gun's got a rich history  - Tato opakovačka má bohatou historii)
_ 
Generally, if you want to say that there is some story behind something, you use 'Historie'_ (Story of his life is full of blood - Jeho život má krvavou historii)_

I hope it will help -)


----------



## Tagarela

Ahoj,

Norzog, thank you for the nice (and violent ) examples! And Welcome to the forum!

As for tales, plots and so on, I should also use *historie* - "_Tato kniha má dobrou historii_"?

Nashled.:


----------



## Norzog

Tagarela said:


> Ahoj,
> 
> Norzog, thank you for the nice (and violent ) examples! And Welcome to the forum!
> 
> As for tales, plots and so on, I should also use *historie* - "_Tato kniha má dobrou historii_"?
> 
> Nashled.:




Thanks, 

I am not exactly sure what do you want to express, but yea, you should use 'Historie' in such cases.


----------



## Tagarela

Ahoj,

Well, I intend to say in the cases when we talk about books, movies, plays. 

Mm, could you give some examples where *dějiny* would be the best option? 

Thank you again

Nashled.:


----------



## Norzog

I still can't clearly see, where you would talk about books' or movies' history, but ok.

As for your second question, like I said in my previous post, you use 'Dějiny'  generally when refering to a history of something, meaning its entire history, from the very past until now. History of countries, history of art, history of sea travel and so on. When you're talking about things where you want to express how it developed in time (guns, planes, sea travel, literature).

I hope you understand now, if not, feel free to ask -)


----------



## Jana337

Tagarela, if you mean something like "storyline", I would suggest "zápletka" or "děj", not "historie".


----------



## Norzog

Jana337 said:


> Tagarela, if you mean something like "storyline", I would suggest "zápletka" or "děj", not "historie".



How come I didn't get it the first time. It seems so obvious now, when I re-read it. I didn't take a look at whole picture. Thanks for the help, Jana.


----------



## Tagarela

Ahoj,

Yes, Jana got it. I should have said *story* perhaps, not history - Portuguese influences .

Norzog, thank you for your effort anyway. 

Nashled.:


----------



## texpert

Tagarela said:


> Mm, could you give some examples where *dějiny* would be the best option?
> .:


 
I believe there are instances where *dějiny *is the *only option* - for example where two Latin words would collide (*dějiny literatury, architektury*) or where the subject is too abstract (*dějiny násilí, lži*). 

To the contrary (and my own sudden illumination), the smaller and more _tangible_ the subject is, the more likely one will use *historie -* *města, hradu, domu *(as it was already mentioned). _*Tato váza má pohnutou historii*_.


----------



## werrr

Jana337 said:


> werrr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say that “dějiny” is used for the events in the course of all time, while “historie” only for the past events.
> 
> 
> 
> Hm. Could you write down some examples, please?
Click to expand...

You surely know that there is no strict and exclusive codification of the Czech semantics, so nobody can prescribe such a nuance in meaning, but I still think there are some phrases and usages which indicate this difference.

The word “historie” has its own history in foreign languages and I think there is pretty big consensus in most of the languages that it refers to the past events. It needn’t be an aggregate of the events past to the present, but it’s always an aggregate of the events past to a particular moment. The Czech usage of the word “historie” is limited by this factor.

The word “dějiny” is an artificial construct of the National Revival. It was created as a Czech substitute of the word “historie”. That means that the original meaning was supposed to be identical. On the other hand, it was a new word etymologically unrelated to “historie” - it’s cognate to the verb “dít se” (= to happen, to occur). This was much weaker obstacle for the extension of the meaning to the events of all times.

OK, some examples which indicate the difference (The examples are not strict, I just want to point out the tendencies to use something more frequently):

We have “dějiny současnosti” or “současné/soudobé dějiny”. Surely, it is possible to find the analogical terms based on the word “historie”, but it is rather exceptional. This is most likely because Czechs feel the latter as a kind of oxymoron.
Yes, I know English and French use “contemporary history” and “histoire contemporaine” respectivelly, but that’s because they have no alternative word. Germans are in similar situation like us, they have two words “die Historie” and “die Geschichte” (< geschehen = to occur, to happen). Germans use the word “Historie” less than Czechs, but they tend to avoid it in this particular meaning in the same way as the Czechs.

There are some idioms (clichés?) which operate only with the word “dějiny” and whose meaning is not restricted to the past, e.g. “běh/kolo dějin”, “držet prst na tepu dějin”.

We use rather “zastavit dějiny” than “zastavit historii”.

The difference could be distorted for derived words, but it still indicates something:

“Historický” is used mostly as “related to the past”, “imitating the past” or “notable” (= worth of a note in history), while  “dějinný” is used rather as “influencing the development”. The difference is even more obvious for the derived words “historičnost” and “dějinnost”.

Compare:

historické období - mostly used as past era, notable era
×
dějinné období - commonly used as all past, current and future era

historický úděl ~ burden of the past (either past burden or burden from the past)
× 
dějinný úděl ~ destiny, eternal burden


----------

