# Haase (surname)



## countduckula

Hi!
What does "Haase" mean?
It's my father's last name and i wonder if it has a meaning
Thanks!


----------



## JClaudeK

"H*a*se" = hare/ rabbit

I don't know if "H*aa*se" has the same origin.


----------



## berndf

JClaudeK said:


> "H*a*se" = hare/ rabbit
> 
> I don't know if "H*aa*se" has the same origin.


If is almost certainly a spelling variant of _Hase_ though other etymologies are possible. This spelling is most frequent in the N & NE, probably influence by Low German spelling conventions. The meaning _Hase = rabbit_ is exclusively Southern. In the North is only means _hare_.


----------



## Frank78

(Although you might not like hearing it)

I don't know if a hare has the same symbolism in your culture like in ours but here it represents cowardice and shyness. I guess that's how your ancestors got this name.


----------



## bearded

Frank78 said:


> it represents cowardice and shyness


Couldn't it just represent 'speed'? In this country it is very common to say ''he was speedy as a hare'' (.._veloce come una lepre_). To me, cowardice and shyness rather seem to be characteristics of a _Kaninchen _(rabbit).  Well, in German the usage might be different..
And: Countduckula, did you see this? Haase Name Meaning & Haase Family History at Ancestry.com, and this? Haase (Familienname) – GenWiki


----------



## berndf

bearded said:


> Couldn't it just represent 'speed'?


Sometimes, yes. But fear and cowardice is the main association.


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> The meaning _Hase = rabbit_ is exclusively Southern. In the North is only means _hare_.


 What is used in the north for "rabbit"?  "Kaninchen"?

By the way, in the US the distinction between rabbits and hares is pretty much completely irrelevant outside of scientific or technical contexts.  In fact, I don't really know what the difference is, except that I _think_ hares are larger (???) and live in the wild (???).  I think the only context I've ever heard "hare" used in in English is the fable "The Tortoise and the Hare."


----------



## Alemanita

countduckula said:


> Hi!
> What does "Haase" mean?
> It's my father's last name and i wonder if it has a meaning
> Thanks!


Nowadys it sounds like Hase, the hare, as has been said.
But mind you, it could have meant something quite different some centuries ago. For instance, the meaning of Hassfurt (nowadays most people laugh and say: What? A town called Ford of Hate?) originally was: the foggy ford; later people forgot that meaning and chose a hare as a coat of arms for that town ... because they thought it meant: the ford of hares.

Hares and rabbits can be told one from the other because the wild hare is bigger than the wild rabbit, the hare has longer ears, the habitat (in the open for the hare, in holes for the rabbit) the tail ...


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> What is used in the north for "rabbit"? "Kaninchen"?


_Kaninchen = rabiit
Hase = hare_

I don't like the distinction "North/South" here, because in modern standard language the biological distinction is absolutely clear in all regions. It is just a dialectally influenced and old-fashioned non-standard way not do clearly distinguish both species when using "Hase" in Southern regions. But nowadays, "Hase" und "Kaninchen" are surely clearly identified correctly everywhere when speaking standard language.

On the other side there are stupid terms like "Stallhase" for rabbits in cages in old-fashioned Northern German, too. "Osterhasen" are usually depicted more like rabbits, too, in all regions.



Frank78 said:


> represents cowardice and shyness


I mostly connect it with FEARFULNESS and to be EASILY FRIGHTENED. I do not really see shyness in the metaphorical meaning.

_Angsthase
Hasenfuß_
Engl: _scaredy cat_



bearded said:


> 'he was speedy as a hare


In other languages yes, but not so in German. Without text below "hare" icons I used to wonder what that is supposed to mean. But the association of speedy hares appears to be present in many languages, but not so in German.


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> I don't like the distinction "North/South" here, because in modern standard language the biological distinction is absolutely clear in all regions. It is just a dialectally influenced and old-fashioned non-standard way not do clearly distinguish both species when using "Hase" in Southern regions. But nowadays, "Hase" und "Kaninchen" are surely clearly identified correctly everywhere when speaking standard language.


Correct and not correct are irrelevant categories. Biological terminology (_Fachsprache_), northern common and southern common languages are simply three registers with three different definitions. In the southern common register _Hase_ is a generic term for both while in the other two it is not.

With respect to the _Fachsprache_ register you are right that there is no geographical distinction but for the common register there is one.


----------



## elroy

Up until today I had no idea anything other than “Hase” was used for “rabbit.”  “Hase” is what is taught to learners.  I’ve only ever come across “Kaninchen” in the compound word “Versuchskaninchen.”


----------



## JClaudeK

berndf said:


> Correct and not correct are irrelevant categories. Biological terminology (_Fachsprache_), northern common and southern common languages are simply three registers with three different definitions. *In the southern common register Hase is a generic term for both* while in the other two it is not.


----------



## Frieder

Kajjo said:


> But the association of speedy hares appears to be present in many languages, but not so in German.



I can still remember the expression "das Hasenpanier zeigen/ergreifen" which has become obsolete by now. But it means _to take to one's heels_. So there is (or was) a speedy hare in German, too.



elroy said:


> I’ve only ever come across “Kaninchen” in the compound word “Versuchskaninchen.”



If you go to a German Metzgerei (butcher shop) you'll most likely find _Kaninchen _for sale but you'll hardly ever find _Hase_. I once had _Hase _for dinner and it was full of lead shot . With _Kaninchen _you don't have that problem (except for Wildkaninchen).

And *never *use the word _Hase _in the presence of a Kaninchenzüchter (rabbit breeder) – they are known to lack any kind of humor regarding their field of activity.


----------



## JClaudeK

bearded said:


> Couldn't it just represent 'speed'? In this country it is very common to say ''he was speedy as a hare''


In French, too.
There is the famous fable of _La Fontaine_ "Le Lièvre et la Tortue" that influences the perception of "hares" = speed.

In the Wikipedia-article are links to many langages, but not to German. (Ein Zeichen?!)


----------



## Frieder

We have "Der Hase und der Igel", too. But not as a fable by La Fontaine, but as a fairy tale (Märchen) by Wilhelm Schröder (Het Wettloopen tüschen den Haasen und den Swinegel up de Buxtehuder Heid).


----------



## Kajjo

Frieder said:


> "das Hasenpanier zeigen/ergreifen"


I don't think so. The "Hasenpanier" focuses on escaping, or maybe even deserting because of fear and a lack of bravery and loyalty. It is not primarily about speed. I think the translation led you astray.



Frieder said:


> We have "Der Hase und der Igel", too.


Yeah, but that does not empasise on the speed of hares, but on the cleverness of the hedgehog. Of course, hares are faster than hedgehogs. Both are typical field-forest border animals.



Frieder said:


> Kaninchenzüchter (rabbit breeder) – they are known to lack any kind of humor regarding their field of activity


Yes, the famous "Kaninchenzüchtermentalität"... narrow-minded, conventional in the negative sense, uninspired...



elroy said:


> “Hase” is what is taught to learners.


In which context (seriously!) do you learn about "Hase" when being taught languages? "Kaninchen" and "Hase" are equally common words in standard language.



elroy said:


> I’ve only ever come across “Kaninchen” in the compound word “Versuchskaninchen.”


Yeah, right, "Versuchskaninchen" is common. At least in Northern Germany we mostly talk about rabbits as (1) delicious roast for eating, and (2) pet rabbits for children. In both applications the difference to hares are imminent.



Frieder said:


> I once had _Hase _for dinner


Wir braten regelmäßig sowohl Hasen wie auch Kaninchen und ich mag beide sehr gerne. Hase hat dunkles Fleisch mit charakteristischem Wildgeschmack und wird typischerweise mit Speck gespickt und wie andere Wildgerichte mit Preiselbeeren serviert. Wir legen den Hasen vorher zwei Tage in Buttermilch ein, damit er milder schmeckt. Kaninchen dagegen hat sehr helles Fleisch von mildem Geschmack. Ich wette, dass beide Tiere im Süden ebenfalls gegessen werden und da die Unterscheidung dort ebenso wichtig ist und auch sprachlich stattfindet.



berndf said:


> southern common register


Oh my God. Not again. This is not "common register" but simply dialect. The lack of proper distinction is not part of standard German. Why do we always discuss dialect?!


----------



## JClaudeK

elroy said:


> By the way, in the US the distinction between rabbits and hares is pretty much completely irrelevant outside of scientific or technical contexts.


Genau so ist es im südlichen deutschen Sprachraum. (Auch wenn das Kajjo bis jetzt noch nicht zu Ohren gekommen ist .)


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> in the US the distinction between rabbits and hares is pretty much completely irrelevant outside of scientific or technical contexts


And outside of culinay context, I suppose, because both are eaten frequently and taste entirely different. See #16.



elroy said:


> I don't really know what the difference is, except that I _think_ hares are larger (???) and live in the wild (???)


Search "hares" on youtube and you will find a lot of videos explaining the difference. If you ever saw a hare, you would know how much larger and faster they are and how entirely different their running pattern is as compared to cute little rabbits.

Rabbits live in the wild, too. We have a lot of naturally wild rabbits in heath and field lanscapes, sometimes like a pest. There are domestic rabbits, though, which are bred for different kind of purposes like being a pet (Farbenzwerg – Wikipedia) or for their meat or pelt (Hauskaninchen – Wikipedia). Rabbit pelt used to be an pretty wide-spread and important cheaper fur.



JClaudeK said:


> im südlichen deutschen Sprachraum. (Auch wenn das Kajjo bis jetzt noch nicht zu Ohren gekommen is


That's not funny. I know about the rabbit/hare ignorance in Southern dialectal areas, but I do not euphemise this to a "common register". Further, I am convinced that every minimal-educated German knows that there is a difference, even if he uses in his dialect the same word for the two species. I have no problem with some regions using the word as general term, I simply have a problem with not calling regional or dialectal usages what they are. The Duden lists it as "landschaftlich". That's fair enough.


----------



## elroy

Kajjo said:


> In which context (seriously!) do you learn about "Hase" when being taught languages?


 You don't think foreigners are taught the names of common animals?   I don't remember the exact situation or context in which I was taught "Hase," but I know for a fact that's what I was taught for "rabbit" - and it's the only word I can recall being used for that (though the latter could be due to confirmation bias; maybe I wasn't registering "Kaninchen" when I did hear it).


Kajjo said:


> Search "hares" on youtube and you will find a lot of videos explaining the difference.


 I'm not claiming there aren't any important differences.  I'm saying that for the vast majority of Americans, these differences are irrelevant.  The word "hare" is almost never used.  Educated Americans are familiar with it, but that's about it. 





Kajjo said:


> And outside of culinay context, I suppose, because both are eaten frequently and taste entirely different.


 In the US, neither rabbit nor hare is commonly consumed.  This could be a huge reason as to why the distinction doesn't matter to most people.


----------



## Hutschi

I'm from the south of "Thüringer Wald" - and there "Kaninchen" are usually called "Hasen" in the default register. In scientific, in zoological and in biological context, they are recognized and called differently, of course. As name: I do not know any person called "Kaninchen", but many are called "Hase" or "Haase".

"Ancestry" page Bedeutung des Namens "Haase" in Deutschland - Ancestry.de confirms "Haase" is a form of "Hase", as stated in #2 and 3.


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> what I was taught for "rabbit"


That I cannot really believe and would be very sad. "Hase" is only dialectal for rabbit, otherwise for hare. No teacher should propagate such nonsense. Teachers should properly name rabbits and hares or simply teach only important species.



elroy said:


> This could be a huge reason as to why the distinction doesn't matter to most people.


Indeed, it could be the reason. "Osterhasen" are easter bunnies and kind of ignore the species anyway which appears to be reasonable for a phantasy animal. Maybe most people never really meet hares, beside those who hunt or live in rural regions.

I reckon the English do not really use "rabbit" as generic term, but are simply not too much aware of hares. In contrast, in Germany I believe most people are aware of both species, but in Southern dialects they use "Hase" as generic term to cover both.



Hutschi said:


> I do not know any person called "Kaninchen", but many are called "Hase" or "Haase".


Indeed, me too. There are zero entries in Geogen for surname "Kaninchen" and a lot more for "Haase" than "Hase".



Hutschi said:


> in biological context


And in culinary context?


----------



## Hutschi

At home, it Kaninchenbraten is called "Hasenbraten". In shops, there is a difference.

Other than Kaninchen, Hasen are hunted and they seldom come from farms, if at all.
My Grandparens had "Hasen" - but they were Kaninchen.

Cats are called "Dachhasen" (roof hares) in my home region in Thuringia. But not where I live now, in Saxxony. May be by culinary reasons.
See also: http://www.lwl.org/medienarchiv_web/liederblaetter?id=184115 My mother taught me this song before she died.

We can notice, however, that idioms (Redensarten/Redewendungen) are seldom now.
---

Back to topic:



I cannot imagine that today "Hase/Haase" is connected with cowardness. At least not today.
In "Hase und Wolf" hat der Wolf immer das Nachsehen.
In fairy tales about hares and wolves the wolves usually are the looser.



Another thing is "Hasenfuß" - this is connected.


----------



## elroy

Kajjo said:


> That I cannot really believe and would be very sad. "Hase" is only dialectal for rabbit, otherwise for hare. No teacher should propagate such nonsense. Teachers should properly name rabbits and hares or simply teach only important species.


 Wiktionary says:


> While English-speakers tend to mistakenly use the word “rabbit” for hares, the German tendency is reverse: _Hase_ is sometimes mistakenly used instead of Kaninchen, and it is generally the preferred word whenever the distinction is irrelevant or impossible to tell. (For example, a bunny girl is a Häschen in German, never a _Kaninchen_.)


If the part in red is true, then it totally makes sense that "Hase" would be taught for "rabbit," since both are used in their respective languages when the distinction is irrelevant or unrecognizable. 





Kajjo said:


> I reckon the English do not really use "rabbit" as generic term, but are simply not too much aware of hares.


 Those aren't mutually exclusive!  English speakers *do *use "rabbit" as a generic term, *and* they don't know much about hares. 

Honestly, when I saw this post from Bernd:


berndf said:


> In the North is only means _hare_.


 My first thought was "Huh?  There are ordinary people that know what a hare actually is?"


----------



## Kajjo

Hutschi said:


> Kaninchenbraten is called "Hasenbraten"


That's extremely weird. They taste completely different. We like both.



Hutschi said:


> Cats are called "Dachhasen"


As _joking _colloquial term I know this, too. 



Hutschi said:


> May be by culinary reasons.


Around the world wars many people ate cats out of sheer necessity. My mother still buys rabbits only with head in order to be able to distinguish rabbits from cats.


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> If the part in red is true


It is NOT true. Only in Southern dialects it is used as generic term. In Northern Germany nobody would mix them up.

Osterhase (easter bunny) is a phantasy animal, which is mostly depicted along the cuter rabbit style, though. I guess, for fictitious animals the species is not that important.



elroy said:


> Those aren't mutually exclusive! English speakers *do *use "rabbit" as a generic term, *and* they don't know much about hares.


Accepted.



elroy said:


> There are ordinary people that know what a hare actually is?"


I reckon most people know about hares in Germany. Maybe they are more common here or maybe because we eat a lot more of them. I still like that theory of yours.


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> My first thought was "Huh? There are ordinary people that know what a hare actually is?"


Do you have hares at all in North America? Since they can't be domesticated, it is unlikely they have ever been imported.


----------



## elroy

Kajjo said:


> In Northern Germany nobody would mix them up.


 That's not what Wiktionary claimed.

If you were to come across an animal that you knew was one or the other but you weren't sure which, which term would you use? 





berndf said:


> Do you have hares at all in North America?


 I don't know.   I'd have to research it.


----------



## berndf

bearded said:


> Couldn't it just represent 'speed'?


Yes it does. Thinking a bit more about it the association with cowardice is mainly for the meaning _Hase = rabbit_. In Low German folklore _Hase_ is indeed often associated with speed, as in the famous story of _De Has un de Swinegel_.


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> If you were to come across an animal that you knew was one or the other but you weren't sure which, which term would you use?


Difficult, since they are pretty different. Hares ("Feldhase") are a lot larger and if you incidentally see one on a forest hike you certainly won't think about rabbits. Hares are large and fast and quite impressive. 

Rabitts are smaller and a lot cuter. We see rabbits all the time in heather, forest, and coastal ares. I guess everyone knows rabbits by heart -- and moving hares look totally different, even if you haven't seen one before. I guess, pictures of hares fail to convey the size and moving pattern of hares.


----------



## Hutschi

Kajjo said:


> It is NOT true. Only in Southern dialects it is used as generic term. In Northern Germany nobody would mix them up.
> ...


Hi, in southern dialects the dialect form is used, for example "Hosn" or "Husn". In colloquial standard language (not in dialect) they call it "Hasen". The difference is: They speak to each other in dialect, but to me or to you they speak coll. standard German - and here they say "Hasen".

In Grimm "Kaninchen" are a sub group of "Hasen". Wörterbuchnetz - Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm
But this is old.

---

If you want to see cultural connections, search for "Hase und Wolf" or "Nu pogodi!" It meens indeed speed, and additionally cleverness, not pure speed only. (It is not allowed to link videos without confirmation.)


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> I guess, pictures of hares fail to convey the size and moving pattern of hares.


Indeed, if you see them in the wild you would never confuse them.


----------



## Kajjo

Hutschi said:


> Hi, in southern dialects the dialect form is used, for example "Hosn" or "Husn". In colloquial standard language (not in dialect) they call it "Hasen".


I reject this terminology. Either you speak standard language or not. We discussed this way too often.

There are dialectal influences to what Southern people believe to be standard German. It is not. The Duden calls this "mundartlich" or "landschaftlich". It is not standard German. I know many people believe they speak standard German when they reduce their pronunciation dialect, even if they continue to use wrong words or grammar.


----------



## Kajjo

berndf said:


> Indeed, if you see them in the wild you would never confuse them.


 Indeed. Thanks.


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> if you see them in the wild you would never confuse them.


 Most Americans would just say "big rabbit" or something.  I don't think most Americans have even bothered to think about the distinction, or register the two as separate categories in their head, so the question of "confusing them" doesn't really apply as such.


----------



## Hutschi

I found an additional source: 
Haase (Familienname) – GenWiki


mittelhochdeutscher Übername: Spottname des Furchtsamen. "has(e)" = "Hase; bildlich für einen Feigling"; auch für einen schnellfüßigen, feinhörigen oder für einen wunderlichen, albernen Menschen
We discussed the first ones but did not have: wunderlichen, albernen Menschen = strange person who makes many jokes.

Additionally there are mentioned names of rivers.

Hase (Fluss) – Wikipedia

So it might also be the location name of where the family comes from. I am in doubt. But it is possible.
Usually such names come from towns or villages.


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> Most Americans would just say "big rabbit" or something.  I don't think most Americans have even bothered to think about the distinction, or register the two as separate categories in their head, so the question of "confusing them" doesn't really apply as such.


Probably because they have never seen one. Over here they are quite common. Even in regions where _Hase_ can mean both, the people are generally very well aware of the difference so it cannot just be a Whorfian phenomenon.


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> Even in regions where _Hase_ can mean both, the people are generally very well aware of the difference so it cannot just be a Whorfian phenomenon.


 How do you figure?  The overall much stronger awareness of and emphasis on the difference in Germany could very well be a major factor.  I'm sure schoolchildren, for example, are much more likely to be made aware of the difference in school than American schoolchildren.


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> How do you figure?


Because I read your contributions of someone who is talking about something he only knows theoretically. We over here all know hares because we have seen them many times in the fields. You don't have to be taught the difference. Hares and rabbits simply look completely different when you see them running around. If moving at low speed they may look similar but when in full motion, and hares usually are when you see them, they look very different. A running hare looks almost like a running dog. In addition hares can change direction at full speed as if the law of inertia didn't exist. That is very unique and impressive to watch.


----------



## Hutschi

Kaninchen – Wikipedia

Zoologisch gehören die Kaninchen zur Familie der Hasen.
In zoology Kaninchen belong to the family of Hasen.

-----

In translation of names, it depends.
Literally Hase means hare.
But when you translate the name, I'd use Rabbit, because of symmetries in culture we found during discussion.
Culturally we connect it with speed and some kind of oddity.
I do not think about cowardness in connection with names.


----------



## eamp

There are many more species of hares and rabbits native to North America than the two common in the German speaking area of Europe. 
European rabbit ([_Wild_-]_Kaninchen_) and European hare (_Feldhase_) are indeed easy to tell apart, once you have seen both, but I doubt most people know for any given species of the Leporidae (_Hasen_) family whether it is properly a "rabbit" or a "hare". 
And actually it seems many of the American species of the genus Lepus (_Echte Hasen _~ "hares") are rather called "jackrabbits", "hare" not being a common term there.


----------



## Kajjo

Hutschi said:


> Zoologisch gehören die Kaninchen zur Familie der Hasen.


"Family" is taxonomically not so close as you might think. To the family "Canidae" ("Familie der Hunde") belong also foxes, coyotes, jackels, wolves, wild dogs and domestic, bred dogs. Using the same term for hares and rabbits it pretty similar to using the same term for foxes, wolves and dogs. Nobody would do so. Note the taxonomy tree "Family > Genus > Species". No one disputes the fact that there is a common ancestor, but it is farther away than a picture of a sitting, unmoving animal might suggest. Note that hares and rabbits cannot even be cross-bred, because they have a different number of chromosomes.

The Wikipedia link you gave is misleading:

Feldhase / European hare
Wildkaninchen / European rabbit
Hauskaninchen / Domestic rabbit)



berndf said:


> If moving at low speed they may look similar but when in full motion, and hares usually are when you see them, they look very different. A running hare looks almost like a running dog. In addition hares can change direction at full speed as if the law of inertia didn't exist. That is very unique and impressive to watch.


 That's what I meant when we started the whole discussion. A generic term might exit in certain dialectally influenced regions, but most people are aware of the differences of the species.

In standard German "Hase" means "hare" and "Kaninchen" means rabbit. Sometimes I don't understand why such easy concepts are so wildly discussed.


eamp said:


> European rabbit ([_Wild_-]_Kaninchen_) and European hare (_Feldhase_) are indeed easy to tell apart, once you have seen both


That's the point we discussing here anyway. Of course, as soon as we dive into the depth of uncommon species, we need to tell the exact species name and mostly only experts or hobby-zoologists can do so for the more rare species.


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> Because I read your contributions of someone who is talking about something he only knows theoretically. We over here all know hares because we have seen them many times in the fields. You don't have to be taught the difference. Hares and rabbits simply look completely different when you see them running around. If moving at low speed they may look similar but when in full motion, and hares usually are when you see them, they look very different. A running hare looks almost like a running dog. In addition hares can change direction at full speed as if the law of inertia didn't exist. That is very unique and impressive to watch.


 Yes, I got all of that. I'm saying I don't see how this suggests "it cannot just be a Whorfian phenomenon."  I assume that even people in regions where "Hase" is used for both are much more heavily exposed to the linguistic distinction in German than English speakers are to the distinction between "rabbit" and "hare," and this could very well make them more attuned to the distinction between the two animals.  The influence of schooling cannot be discounted either.


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> I'm saying I don't see how this suggests "it cannot just be a Whorfian phenomenon


I see both your sides, but I tend to agree more with Berndf here. Again, I you see both animals in wildlife, it is instantaneously clear that they are different species and deserve two names. The same is true for foxes and wolves for example. This is not just "language shaping the observed facts", but facts standing out for itself.

On the other hand I agree that schooling and maybe even a different attitude towards general knowledge as well as being taught to use one name for both of course influences how you observe the world. And being taught "rabbit" for both species, you probably instinctively think "they must be closer than they look" and "when they sit down I see the relation". So, yes, there might be some Whorfian aspect involved here.


----------



## Bondstreet

.
_>> #25: ...a bunny girl is a Häschen in German, never a Kaninchen..._ 

I always assumed they were "rabbits"...
.


----------



## eamp

Kajjo said:


> That's the point we discussing here anyway. Of course, as soon as we dive into the depth of uncommon species, we need to tell the exact species name and mostly only experts or hobby-zoologists can do so for the more rare species.


The thing is, unless we are talking about pet rabbits, an American is not actually referring to either of those two species when using the word "rabbit". They might not have ever seen either in the wild even, but encounter a variety of local species frequently (not talking about rare ones here, just basic woodland creatures). 
So I don't think the German distinction means much to the average American and insisting on mapping the words one to one may be misleading.


----------



## Hutschi

eamp said:


> ...
> So I don't think the German distinction means much to the average American and insisting on mapping the words one to one may be misleading.



Exactly. It might be misleading. Of course Kajjo is right by describing them as different species. But the folk does not always follow scientists in speech. I am sure, that Hasenstall and Kaninchenstall are the same (except in zoos)  --  after looking into pictures were they sell them --  and both are used for species Kaninchen. Pons hasenstall : Englisch » Deutsch | PONS translates it as "Rabbit hutch", and this it is. It is not a hare hutch. I never ever heared that hares (species) are living in rabbit hatches.

----
And we should also note that family names were built long before modern taxonomy.

Note that Hase is a *heraldic animal*: "Wappentier"
This might be interesting for the family: Hase (Wappentier) – Wikipedia

It is a picture resembling the real world ("gemeine Figur")

In _heraldic pictures _as well hares as rabbits are used for the name "Hase" Hase (Wappentier) – Wikipedia and for spelling variants Haase, Hahse, Has or Haas.

As pictures they mutate between hares and rabbits.

---


----------



## JClaudeK

berndf said:


> We over here all know hares because we have seen them many times in the fields.


Are you kidding? 
I bet that there are not more than, say, 5% of people in Germany ever have seen a hare in a field.


----------



## berndf

JClaudeK said:


> Are you kidding?
> I bet that there are not more than, say, 5% of people in Germany ever have seen a hare in a field.


 Auch Städter sind manchmal auf dem Land und Feldhasen sind nun wirklich nichts seltenes.


----------



## JClaudeK

berndf said:


> Auch Städter sind manchmal auf dem Land und Hasen sind nun wirklich nichts seltenes.


Und die Hasen spazieren dann schön langsam in nächster Nähe an den Leute vorbei, so dass man den Unterschied zwischen einem Kaninchen und einem Hasen genau feststellen kann.


----------



## Hutschi

Hasen ziehen sich auch immer stärker in Städte zurück. Ich habe mehrfach Hasen (Feldhasen) in der Südvorstadt in Dresden bei meiner Mutter auf dem Hof beobachtet.
Dagegen waren am Hasenberg in Dresden eher Kaninchen zu sehen.
Man kann also heute in vielen Städten auch Hasen beobachten. Sie sind allerdings sehr scheu.

(In anderen Städten habe ich sie zwar nicht gesehen, aber darüber gelesen.)


----------



## berndf

JClaudeK said:


> Und die Hasen spazieren dann schön langsam in nächster Nähe an den Leute vorbei, so dass man den Unterschied zwischen einem Kaninchen und einem Hasen genau feststellen kann.


Einen im gesteckten Galopp abhauenden Feldhasen kann man nun wirklich nicht mit dem Hoppeln eines Kaninchen verwechseln. Die nehmen nämlich meist Reißaus, wenn sie Menschen sehen.


----------



## JClaudeK

berndf said:


> Einen im gesteckten Galopp abhauenden Feldhasen kann man nun wirklich nicht mit dem Hoppeln eines Kaninchen verwechseln.


Ich habe hier seit Jahren (vielleicht sogar Jahrzehnten) weder Hasen noch Kaninchnen auf freier Wildbahn - und noch viel weniger in der Stadt - gesehen. Sollte es in Dtl. so viele geben? Das wären ja dann schon beinahe "australische" Verhältnisse!


----------



## Hutschi

Feldhase – Wikipedia
2016 waren es noch ca. 11 Feldhasen/Quadratkilometer

Hasen habe ich in Dresden in den letzten Jahren zwei- bis dreimal pro Jahr gesehen.
Kaninchen schon lange nicht mehr in freier Wildbahn.


----------



## Kajjo

Hutschi said:


> But the folk does not always follow scientists in speech


Ach komm, um Feldhasen von Kaninchen zu unterscheiden, muss man kein Wissenschaftler sein. Langam reicht es. Wir haben alle unsere Positionen dargelegt. Es bleibt dabei, dass im Süden "Hase" umgangssprachlich auch (!) als generischer Ausdruck verwendet wird, während die beiden Species in anderen Regionen auch sprachlich klar auseinander gehalten werden.


Hutschi said:


> that Hasenstall and Kaninchenstall are the same


Nur in jenen Gebieten, in denen "Hase" generisch verwendet wird. Bei uns spricht man schon von Kaninchenställen.


Hutschi said:


> I never ever heared that hares (species) are living in rabbit hatches


Richtig, denn Hasen kann man nicht in Ställen halten. Sie brauchen viel zu viel Auslauf und Bewegung und gehen in Gefangenschaft schnell ein. Es gibt keine domestizierten Hasen als Nutztierrasse.


Hutschi said:


> Note that Hase is a *heraldic animal*: "Wappentier"


Und hier wird der Hase selbst symbolisch richtig als Hase und nicht als Kaninchen dargestellt. Wo du da deine Kaninchen siehst, weiß ich nicht.


Hutschi said:


> Kaninchen schon lange nicht mehr in freier Wildbahn.


Das ist seltsam und offensichtlich regional stark verschieden. Bei uns gibt es eher zu viel Kaninchen in Wiesen- und Heidelandschaften und an der Ost- und Nordseeküste sowie auf den Nordseeinseln sind sie geradezu eine Pest -- wenn auch niedlich.

Kaninchen sehe ich hier im Großraum Hamburg quasi jeden Tag. Selbst in der Stadt ist kaum eine Grünzone kaninchenfrei. Teilweise sitzen ganze Rudel müffelnd in der Dämmerung selbst in den Vorgärten von großen Wohnhausanlagen. Also Kaninchen kennt und sieht hier jedes Kind ab frühester Jugend.

Wir hatten einen Chinesen in der Arbeitsgruppe, der die Biester im Park einer Seniorenwohnanlage erfolgreich gejagt hat (mit Schaufel plattgehauen), bis sie es ihm verboten haben, weil die Senioren es zu grausig fanden. Er hatte sich monatelang davon ernährt.


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> Es bleibt dabei, dass im Süden "Hase" umgangssprachlich auch (!) als generischer Ausdruck verwendet wird, während die beiden Species in anderen Regionen auch sprachlich klar auseinander gehalten werden.


Ich glaube du irrst Dich da. Auch Sprecher die sich der Unterscheidung inhaltlich bewusst sind, treffen sie meiner Erfahrung nach dennoch so gut wie nie sprachlich. Es gibt einfach zu wenig Sprechsituationen, in denen sie notwendig sind. Auch in südlichen Dialekten gibt es Ausdrücke um eine Klarstellung zu erreichen, im bairischen z.B. _Kiniglhas_ und _Faidhas_, die werden aber nur sehr selten benutzt, jüngere Sprecher kennen sie oft nicht einmal mehr.


----------



## Hutschi

In der Wikipedia steht sinngemäß, dass die Population von Feldhasen in Sachsen am kleinsten von allen Bundesländern ist.
Wie genau das ist, weiß ich nicht.
Feldhase – Wikipedia


> Im Jahr 2016 lebten in Deutschland durchschnittlich 11 Hasen pro Quadratkilometer (2011 waren es 12), wobei regional starke Unterschiede vorlagen. Die niedrigsten Bestände finden sich in den Neuen Bundesländern mit durchschnittlich 5 Tieren, in Sachsen nur 3, während in Nordrhein-Westfalen die größte Population mit durchschnittlich 17 Feldhasen pro Quadratkilometer anzutreffen ist.



Hase (Wappentier) – Wikipedia


> Der Hase kann auch zu einem *Kaninchen* im Wappen mutieren. Es sollte aber auch dann als solches beschrieben werden. Erkennbar ist es an der typischen Sitzhaltung als Hauptunterschied zum Hasen und seinen langen oft aufgestellten Ohren.


 (_Er sollte_ ... weist darauf hin, dass es nicht immer so ist ...)

Hallo, Kajjo,

ich versuche, mich auf die mit der Fragestellung zusammenhängenden Sachen zu beschränken.
Dazu gehört, wie ein Name entstanden ist und was er bedeutet.
Namen sind überregional verbreitet. Und wenn wir den Namen in eine andere Kultur übersetzen, ist das komplexer als die Beschreibung einer Spezies. Dazu gehören geschichtliche und kulturelle Kenntnisse. Du  empfindest es als viel wesentlicher, dass Hase vom Feldhasen abgeleitet wäre, als ich. Ich habe deshalb die Dialekte aus meinen Betrachtungen zunächst weggelassen, wenngleich sie eine Rolle spielen. Regionale Unterschiede sind aber gerade im Kontext bedeutsam. Im Kontext ist es unwesentlich, ob Hase oder Kaninchen als Spezies gemeint ist. Ich empfinde die Übersetzung als "Rabbit" zutreffend und quasisymmetrisch zur deutschen Situation. Eher als die wissenschaftlichere Übersetzung "Hare".

Das ist ähnlich wie bei Reh und Hirsch. Kulturell wird das Reh im Englischen zum Hirsch (Was man in Filmen sieht). Man muss also beides erläutern, die Spezies und die kulturellen Eigenschaften.

---

Wir können als gesichert annehmen, dass der Familienname "Hase" bedeutet. In Englisch _hare _oder _rabbit, _je nachdem, welche Aspekte man beachtet.
Zugeordnet sind die weiter oben mehrfach beschriebenen Eigenschaften.


----------



## Kajjo

berndf said:


> Auch Sprecher die sich der Unterscheidung inhaltlich bewusst sind, treffen sie meiner Erfahrung nach dennoch so gut wie nie sprachlich.


Genau das habe ich doch in meiner Zusammenfassung geschrieben -- gültig für jene südliche Dialektgebiete, die "Hase" generisch verwenden. Im Nordern verwendet man die beiden Begriffe weit überwiegend passend.


----------



## Kajjo

Hutschi said:


> Im Kontext ist es unwesentlich, ob Hase oder Kaninchen als Spezies gemeint ist. Ich empfinde die Übersetzung als "Rabbit" zutreffend und quasisymmetrisch zur deutschen Situation. Eher als die wissenschaftlichere Übersetzung "Hare".


Das sehe ich vollkommen anders. Niemand will den Nachnamen wirklich übersetzen -- der Fragesteller will wissen, was er bedeutet und welche Konnotationen er möglicherweise trägt. Da muss man den Unterschied zwischen großen, schnellen, flitzenden, boxenden Hasen und süßen kleinen Kanickeln schon darlegen. Der Unterschied ist hier wichtig und nicht etwa nebensächlich.



Hutschi said:


> Kulturell wird das Reh im Englischen zum Hirsch (Was man in Filmen sieht).


Auch das ist keineswegs pauschal der Fall. Mir fällt eigentlich nur Bambi ein, das in der Literaturvorlage ein Reh ist und dessen Vater bei Disney zum eindrucksvollen Weißwedelhirsch mutiert. Das ist einfach Disney. Ob man das wiederum Kultur nennen soll... egal.


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> Im Nordern verwendet man die beiden Begriffe weit überwiegend passend.


Mit _passend_ oder _unpassend_ hat das wenig zu tun. Norddeutschen Dialekten fehlt einfach die Möglichkeit sich generisch auszudrücken und sie müssen darum eine i.d.R. in der Sprechsituation uninteressante Unterscheidung zu treffen. Um ein anderes Beispiel zu geben: Wir reden im Deutschen oft von _Käfern_ ohne zu spezifizieren, ob es sich um einen Marienkäfer, Maikäfer, Mistkäfer etc. handelt, weil das im Kontext einfach nicht wichtig ist. Französisch fehlt ein entsprechender Ausdruck und Sprecher sind gezwungen genauer zu sein oder auf einen noch allgemeineren Ausdruck  (_insect_) auszuweichen.


----------



## Kajjo

berndf said:


> Norddeutschen Dialekten fehlt einfach die Möglichkeit sich generisch auszudrücken und sie müssen darum eine i.d.R. in der Sprechsituation uninteressante Unterscheidung zu treffen.


Es geht um die Standardsprache, nicht um "norddeutsche Dialekte". Hier spricht quasi niemand mehr Dialekt. Plattdeutsch und Missingsch sind unbedeutend geworden.

In der deutschen Standardsprache werden Kaninchen und Hase biologisch korrekt verwendet und diese beiden Species unterschieden. Das ist richtig. Ich kann nicht erkennen, dass dies ein Nachteil wäre, denn die Unterscheidung ist in fast allen Sprechsituationen des realen Lebens leicht zu treffen und keineswegs als unbedeutend abzutun. Egal ob Kinder nun das eine oder andere Tier sehen oder es darum geht, was es zum Mittagessen gibt, die Unterscheidung ist wichtig und absolut gar nicht unbedeutend.

Das Beispiel _Käfer_ gefällt mir, aber Käfer ist ja auch deswegen ein geeigneter Oberbegriff, weil er eben nicht gleichzeitig auch eine Species bezeichnet. Das Problem "Hase" wird hier doch nur deswegen diskutiert, weil Oberbegriff und Species gleichlautend bezeichnet werden. Das ist eine ziemlich dämliche Beschränkung aus meiner Sicht.


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> Hier spricht quasi niemand mehr Dialekt. Plattdeutsch und Missingsch sind unbedeutend geworden.


In Städten um Süden auch nicht. Dennoch tragen die Alltagssprachen Dialektale Beeinflussungen. In Noddeutschland ist die ein Beispiel.



Kajjo said:


> Es geht um die Standardsprache


Auch da ist die Situation noch so eindeutig, wie Du sie wahrnimmst. Selbst taxonomisch heißt die Familie, zu denen sowohl Hasen als auch Kaninchen zählt, lateinisch _Leporidae_, auf deutsch _Hasen_. Wenn man standardsprachlich wirklich unmissverständlich sein will, muss man von _echten Hasen_ (_Lepus_) sprechen oder, wenn es nur um den europäischen Hasen geht, von _Feldhasen_. Ich halte die Annahme, den Ausdruck _Hasen_ für die ganze Familie zu verwenden sei _inkorrekt_ oder _unpassend_ in der Tat für Dialektbeeinflussung.


----------



## Hutschi

Kajjo said:


> ... Das Problem "Hase" wird hier doch nur deswegen diskutiert, weil Oberbegriff und Species gleichlautend bezeichnet werden. Das ist eine ziemlich dämliche Beschränkung aus meiner Sicht.


Das stimmt im Prinzip. Man könnte auch immer Feldhase sagen, das macht aber fast(?) niemand.

Wir haben nun ziemlich viel diskutiert.

Ich versuche, zusammenzufassen.

1. Haase, Hase, Has, Haas und ähnliche Namensformen sind vom Tier "Hase" abgeleitet.
2. Es hat mehrere kulturelle Bedeutungen: Schnelligkeit, Sonderlichkeit und Ähnliches.- Feigling (ich denke eher nicht bei Namen -- Feigling ist eher negativ, die anderen Bedeutungen sind eher positiv). 
Der Hase kommt zum Beispiel in Filmen und in Geschichten vor, wo er meist den Wolf, der ihn fressen will, durch Schnelligkeit, Wendigkeit und Geschicklichkeit  an der Nase herumführt. Andererseits wird er in der _Geschichte vom Hasen und Igel_ vom Igel überlistet.
3. Hase ist Wappentier
4. Hase ist oft synonym zu Feldhase. Im Süden bedeutet das Wort, wenn der Unterschied keine Rolle spielt, Feldhase oder Kaninchen. 
Den Unterschied darzustellen, ist wichtig.
5. Hase kann ein Kosewort sein, besonders als Diminutiv "Häslein".
6. In Englisch ist es "hare", wenn man die Art betrachtet und den Unterschied zum Kaninchen als wichtig ansieht.
7. In Englisch wird als Oberbegriff meist "rabbit" verwendet, wenn der Unterschied unwesentlich ist.
8. Auch in Gebieten, in denen Hase als gemeinsamer Begriff für Feldhase und Kaninchen verwendet wird, kennt man den Unterschied im Allgemeinen.
9. Wenn man die Tiere sieht, zum Beispiel in Städten oder auf Feldern, erkennt man den Unterschied gut.
10. Für eine Übersetzung ist der Zweck (Kontext) wichtig. 

Ich hoffe, dass ich die wesentlichen Teile erfasst habe und nur das, was im Wesentlichen Konsens ist, geschrieben habe.

Gegebenenfalls sollten wir es dann in Englisch übersetzen für den Originalposter.


----------



## JClaudeK

Kajjo said:


> Kaninchen sehe ich hier im Großraum Hamburg quasi jeden Tag. Selbst in der Stadt ist kaum eine Grünzone kaninchenfrei.


Die meisten davon sind bestimmt keine Wildkaninchen, sondern ehemalige Haustiere (oder stammen wenigstens von solchen ab), die verantwortungslose Tierbesitzer ausgesetzt haben, als sie (bzw. ihre Kinder) sich nicht mehr um ihre "niedlichen Müffeltiere" kümmern wollten. Ein Häschen (!)/ Kaninchen als Haustier zu halten ist / (war?) ja große Mode.


----------



## Kajjo

JClaudeK said:


> Die meisten davon sind bestimmt keine Wildkaninchen, sondern ehemalige Haustiere


Das ist definitiv falsch. Es sind Wildkaninchen.


----------



## Kajjo

berndf said:


> sei _inkorrekt_ oder _unpassend_ in der Tat für Dialektbeeinflussung


Welcher Dialekt sollte das sein?! Meine Güte!


----------



## JClaudeK

Kajjo said:


> Das ist definitiv falsch. Es sind Wildkaninchen.


Woran siehst du das, bist du  Experte (auch!) in diesem Bereich?


----------



## Kajjo

JClaudeK said:


> Woran siehst du das,


Berndf wird sicher bestätigen, dass wir in Norddeutschland gemeine Wildkaninchen erkennen. Es handelt sich definitiv so gut wie nie um ausgesetzte Hauskaninchen. Lass deine Sticheleien bitte sein.


----------



## berndf

Kajjo said:


> Welcher Dialekt sollte das sein?! Meine Güte!


Niederdeutsch natürlich. Du musst nicht selbst zweisprachig (Nieder- und Hochdeutsch) sein um in deiner Sprache Dialektbeeinflussung zu haben. Es reicht, wenn die Generation Deiner Urgroßeltern es war.


----------



## Frank78

Kajjo said:


> In der deutschen Standardsprache werden Kaninchen und Hase biologisch korrekt verwendet und diese beiden Species unterschieden.



Nö auch nicht. Es gibt nur die Familie der "Hasen" mit verschiedenen Gattungen XXX-Kaninchen und XXX-Hasen.

Wobei die deutschen Bezeichnungen (im Gegensatz zu den Lateinischen) sowieso nicht offiziell geregelt sind.

Den gleichen "Unsinn" in der Standardsprache gibt's bei Hunden: Hund/Canidae (Familie) -> Wolf/Canis lupus (Art) -> Haushund/Canis lupus familiaris (Unterart)


----------



## mother.of.scorpions

eamp said:


> it seems many of the American species of the genus Lepus (_Echte Hasen _~ "hares") are rather called "jackrabbits", "hare" not being a common term there.



I realize that this thread is several months old now (and that it devolved into being entirely German there at the end), but, as a Southern American (Texas), I wanted to back up the fact that, yes, we do have hares but we primarily refer to them as "jackrabbits" (at least in the south) which was shortened from "jackass rabbit" (jackass=donkey/mule) showing that we've been confused about hares and rabbits from the beginning. And even then, it's really only those of us who grew up in rural areas (or right on the edge of them, like I did) who use the term "jackrabbit" or at least know of it, otherwise, if it hops and has long ears it's a rabbit...or a bunny. It actually wasn't until I was in college studying English/British literature and folklore that I really learned what a "hare" is, that it is the same as a "jackrabbit", and that a hare/jackrabbit isn't just a big rabbit. From what I can gather, since neither rabbits nor hares are commonly eaten in America and most people live in cities or suburban areas, rarely spending extended periods of time in the wild and therefore never seeing a hare/jackrabbit in person, knowing the difference between the two is not that important for us.

Off topic a bit, but, in the south, we have a fakelore creature called a jackalope which is basically a jackrabbit/hare with antlers (though the taxidermy ones you see always have deer antlers and never antelope/pronghorn antlers, but I guess "jackalope" sounds better than "jackdeer" or "deer-rabbit").

Also, in America, we really don't have any folklore/fairy tale references to rabbits/hares/jackrabbits being cowardly or timid, though I can see how other cultures would. From what I'm aware of, we really only have two stories related to hares/rabbits and that's Aesop's "The Tortoise and the Hare" which shows the hare being fast but underestimating his slower opponent in a race (it sounds like y'all have a few similar tales in Germany) and "Br'er/Brer/Bruh Rabbit" who is more of a trickster archetype and gets out of situations using his wit (or "quick" thinking). Br'er Rabbit has sadly fallen out of cultural significance despite the fact that it has deep (well, deep for America) roots tracing back not just to the African slaves, but the Cherokee tribe (located in southeastern America), as well. I also just learned that the Ojibwe tribe (located in the north crossing over into Canada) has a mythological character named Nanabozho who shapeshifts into a rabbit named Mishaabooz ("Great rabbit" or "Hare") or Chi-waabooz ("Big rabbit") and also falls into the trickster archetype. Not that there's a whole lot of relevance to any of that here, but my folklore obsessed brain couldn't not bring it up.


----------



## Kurtchen

I'm sure this thread has the late Richard Adams spinning in his grave (burrow?)!

For what it's worth, I'm more inclined to call them _Karnickel_ rather than _Kaninchen, _as kids we called them_ Mucker._ My first proper hare (not the meat-loaf kind known as _Falscher Hase_, nor the March kind) I only saw as an adolescent, as they are kinda rare around here.


----------

