# through / due to



## ThomasK

I would like to know if you can use the same (or similar) preposition in your language to refer to *through *(_per _in Latin) and *because of, *maybe even to the agent in passive voice*. *

In Dutch we can use *'door' *(probably the same etymological root as through [metathesis]) in two ways, or three:
- (it went) _*door mijn hoofd/ stad *_[through my head/ city] and 
- (there was a lot of loss) *door de regen *(cause, 'as a result of' -- maybe an implicitly passive construction --- but there are more common alternatives in Dutch nowadays)
- *door *can also refer to the passive agent ('*by'* in English). 

_I suddenly think of it: they seem linked in Latin: 

_


> _per: b_y, through, by means of.



More information about that semantic logic is also welcome.


----------



## apmoy70

Ancient Greek «διὰ» (dī'ă) worked this way too; «Διὰ» (dī'ă)--> _through, throughout, by, for, because of, on account of, for the sake of_ (PIE base *di-, the root of _two_).
In Modern Greek, there is a distinction between the two: To indicate _movement into at one side and out at another (metathesis)_, we use the Classical preposition «διά» (ðja, in modern pronunciation). To express the _Cause, Occasion_, or _Purpose_, we use the modern one «γιά» (ja), which - ironically - is the result of «διὰ» through palatalization: «Διὰ»>«διγιά»>«διγιά» (di'a>ðija>ðija).
E.g.  
Ancient Greek:
1/ «Ποιηθέν διὰ χειρῶν» (made by the hands of)
2/ «Τιτρωθείς διὰ τοῦ θώρακος» (he was hit through the chest)
3/ «Δι' ἐμήν ἰότητα» (because of my will)

Modern Greek:
1/ «Θα ταξιδέψω διά θαλάσσης» (I shall travel through the sea)
2/ «Διά της διπλωματικής οδού» (Through the diplomatic way (i.e. diplomatic means)
but
3/ «Κατηγορούμαι γιά φόνο» (I'm accused for murder)


----------



## ThomasK

I see, thanks! Do you see the logic? Are both passing through and causes connections between two 'things'?


----------



## bibax

Czech has another instrument: the instrumental case (the name _"instrumental"_ is somewhat confusing in this case).

Prošlo mi *hlavou* (instr. of hlava). = It went trough my head.
Projel jsem *městem* (instr. of město). = I went trough the city.

The agents of the passive constructions are also expressed by the instrumental case:

zabit *nepřítelem* (instr. of nepřítel) = killed by enemy;
zapomenut *Bohem* (instr. of Bůh) = forgotten by God;

The preposition *skrz* (= trough) is less frequent, it is often used as an adverb:

Jsem promočen *skrz na skrz*. = Ich bin *durch und durch* nass. = _lit._ I am drenched _trough and trough_.

The colloquial use of the preposition _skrz_ instead of the instrumental case is definitely a germanism:

Jedu *skrz* město (instead of correct: Jedu městem). = I am going *through* the city. = ... *durch* die Stadt.

(German _durch_ is a cognate to English _through_, I believe).


----------



## ThomasK

Interesting. But can you use the instrumental case to refer to causes (_losses as a result of the rain_) ? 

German influence must have been very strong then. How come ? 

(I'd wish Hungary and Finland joined us here...)


----------



## bibax

> Interesting. But can you use the instrumental case to refer to causes (losses as a result of the rain) ?


Yes and no. We have to use a kind of passive construction with the agent in instrumental.

 škoda *způsobená deštěm* (instr. of déšť) = a loss _caused by rain_;
 there is no _škoda *skrz* déšť;

_


> German influence must have been very strong then. How come?


In the beginning of the 19th century Prague was a German speaking city. Czech was a language of the village people.


----------



## ThomasK

Do you have alternatives in order to refer to causes then? (_Losses ... < ... rain _?)

I suddenly remember: Franz Kafka lived and wrote in Prague, I believe.


----------



## bibax

Yes. We have various possibilities:

*vinou* (instr.) deště (gen.) = _*by guilt/blame*_ of the rain;
Dostal jsem se do potíží *tvou vinou*. = I got into troubles *because of you*.

*vlivem* (instr.) deště (gen.) = _*by influence/effect*_ of the rain;
_vlivem_ is usually translated: due to sth, owing to sth, as a result of sth;

*díky* dešti  (used mostly for positive results) = *thanks to* the rain;


----------



## jazyk

> - (it went) _*door mijn hoofd/ stad *_[through my head/ city] and
> - (there was a lot of loss) *door de regen *(cause, 'as a  result of' -- maybe an implicitly passive construction --- but there are  more common alternatives in Dutch nowadays)
> - *door *can also refer to the passive agent ('*by'* in English).


We could use the Portuguese preposition _por_ in all three cases, but I think we would be more likely to use _por causa de_ in the second case.


----------



## sakvaka

*Finnish*:

The postposition meaning 'through' is _läpi_, but _kautta_ is also used in some contexts ('via', when referring to a certain route or passageway, usually not the shortest). With _door_, the elative case is often sufficient.

_Harry Potter pakeni Tylypahkasta salakäytävän kautta (or: salakäytävää pitkin). _H P fled from Hogwarts through (or: along) a secret passageway.
_Ajoin Turkuun Helsingin kautta. _I drove to Turku via Helsinki._
Poliitikkoystävien kautta tavallinen kansalainenkin voi saada äänensä kuuluviin. _Through some politician friends, even an ordinary citizen can make themselves heard.
_Mies putosi luolaan maassa olevan reiän läpi/kautta. _The man fell into the cave through a hole in the ground.
_Älä kulje siitä ovesta (= sen oven läpi/kautta), takapihamme on aivan sekaisin! _Don't pass through that door, our backyard is a complete mess!

_Läpi_ cannot be used metaphorically. However, _kautta_ has a certain use. 'Via', 'having achieved', and also 'by means of', 'following the method of', 'by doing sth, especially on purpose'...

_Uusien investointien kautta yritys onnistui tekemään runsaasti voittoa._ By means of (through) some new investments, the company succeeded in making a plenty of profit.
_Voiton kautta hänen eteensä ilmestyi ponnahduslauta maailmanlaajuiseen maineeseen. _Thanks to the victory, a springboard to global renown appeared in front of her eyes.

But it doesn't mean 'due to', or 'by reason of', or 'because of'.

_Alue kärsi laajaa vahinkoa sateen vuoksi / takia / (__syystä) _/ _johdosta_. The area experienced wide-scale damage because of the rain.

_Sateen kautta alue vahingoittui._ doesn't sound good, probably because 'getting damaged' isn't something you usually pursue, and rain is not a medium to achieve a certain goal from a certain starting point.


----------



## ilhermeneuta

In Spanish the preposition _por _would work in both examples. 

Pasó por mi cabeza - It went through my head
Viajar por la ciudad - Travel through the city _or_ Travel by the city
Hubó mucha perdida por tu producto - There was a lot of loss because of your product
Me metí en problemas por tí - I got into trouble because of you


----------



## Saluton

Через (through) could mean по причине (due to) in Russian before. It's archaic usage.


----------



## ThomasK

So it is not a coincidence. I must say I am somewhat surprised, but I am begining to guess the logic !


----------



## apmoy70

ThomasK said:


> I see, thanks! Do you see the logic? Are both passing through and causes connections between two 'things'?


Yes, clearly. «Διά» gives the impression of passing through and connecting two things; a logic which stems from its PIE root: *di-, the root for the numeral _two_


----------



## ThomasK

In the meantime, 6 years later or something, Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, ... foreros have come to join us. Could they tell us how they render the above meaning?


----------



## bazq

Awkwardly, in Modern Hebrew the preposition "through" is "דרך" [derex] which in Biblical Hebrew is a noun - "way" (stems from the root d-r-k "to step") . To make things more interesting [derex] strikes an uncanny resemblance to the Yiddish germanic cognate "durch" [durx] which is "through". Whether the roots of the Modern Hebrew preposition be Biblical Hebrew or Yiddish, only the locative meaning is acceptable in Modern Hebrew, and there's a distinction between "through" and "because of" (= כי [ki], בגלל [biglal], ... )

Hebrew has this exact phenomenon however, with the preposition "on/upon" which can also mean "because of".

Can't say I can construct a semantic explanation for the "through-because of" relationship though... but Spanish has "por" as mentioned in #11, and in French "through" is "par" and "because of" is "*par*ce que" (as if lit. "through this that...", although there's also "à cause de" in French). Perhaps our Romance friends can enlighten us with a semantic link.


----------



## ThomasK

So I understand you have this resemblance location/ reason in the preposition "(up)on"... But you are quite right that the por/par seems to have the same semantic link indeed.


----------



## 810senior

Not in Japanese.

*Through* : を通じて_wo-tsuu-ji-te_(passing through), を通って_wo-too-tte_(passing through)
Either of them was derived from a verb 通じるtsuu-jiru, 通るtoo-ru(通じる refers to reach, lead to; 通る to go/pass through)

We don't use equivalents of the _through _as much as English. It means things that is supposed to mean _through _can vary in a myriad of different forms in the context of writing.
e.g. 風が木々の間をさっと通り抜けた(the wind blew through the trees) lit. blew and went pass
あるアイデアが彼の頭に閃いた(some idea flashed through his head) lit. flashed upon (his head)
昨夜は徹夜で遊び倒した(last night, we was sitting up through the night) lit. on a stay-up night



*Because of* : が原因で_ga-gen'in-de_(in the cause of), のせいで_no-sei-de_(in the blame of)
e.g. 先日の喧嘩が原因で、僕らは別れた。(we walked away because of a break-up yesterday) lit. in the cause of ~
渋滞のせいで、駅に間に合わなかった。(because of congestion, we didn't make it in the station) lit. in the blame of ~


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks! So you  can use through in a temporal and a local sense, that is clear. Do you in fact have prepositions in Japanese? And if so, also simple ones like "in", "with", etc. Can you use any of those figuratively?


----------



## ThomasK

apmoy70 said:


> Yes, clearly. «Διά» gives the impression of passing through and connecting two things; a logic which stems from its PIE root: *di-, the root for the numeral _two_


Interesting hypothesis, but I find a reference to

*van de wortel [from the root] pie. *terh1-* ‘doordringen, overheenkomen’ [penetrate, overcome] (IEW 1075-76),

but suffix added (see German 'durch') [wrsch. [probably] pie. _*-kwe_ (zie ook → *doch [but]*, → *noch [neither]*)]

So no reference to "two". Would you have an idea of equivalents of "dia" in European languages? Just by the way: I have just read that this causal meaning used to be expressed by "bi" (English by) and "van" (English "van" or "from"). So there has been a semantic shift concerning "door".


----------



## Dib

ThomasK said:


> So it is not a coincidence. I must say I am somewhat surprised, but I am begining to guess the logic !



We need to be a bit careful though. Given the samples, it may also be an Indo-European shared structure, or a European areal feature, and not necessarily a wide-spread logic, that diverse languages have come up with independently.



ThomasK said:


> I would like to know if you can use the same (or similar) preposition in your language to refer to *through *(_per _in Latin) and *because of, *maybe even to the agent in passive voice*.*



I'll present some data from the other end of the Indo-European area:

1) Bengali: No.
The translation of "through" depends on the context, most often using phrasal postpositions like "...+genitive moddhe diye" (by the middle of ...), etc. but in the proper context it is possible to use the bare postposition "diye", which usually marks the instrument of an action (similar to Czech instrumental case). So, "kolkata diye jabe" = "They,etc. will go through/via (=diye) Kolkata."

However, I can't think of any context where the same word can be used to mean "due to". "Due to rain" would be "bristi-r phɔl-e" = "by the result of rain", or in proper context, simply the locative case (ending: -e/-te): bristi-te, e.g. (bristi-te) prochur khɔy-khoti hoechhe = A lot of loss/destruction has occurred (due to rains).

In passive construction, Bengali puts the agent in genitive (ending -(e)r): "pikaso-r a~ka" = painted by Picasso.

2) Hindi/Urdu: Yes.
In proper contexts, the postposition "se" (instrumental/ablative marker) can be used in all these senses:
dillī se (guzrā) = (passed) through Delhi
bārish se (nuqsān huā) = (Losses occurred) due to rain

The case of agent marking in the passive voice is a bit complicated, but "se" can be used at least in some contexts:
ham-se (nahī~ dekhā gayā) = (could not be seen) by us, i.e. we could not bear to watch.


----------



## 810senior

ThomasK said:


> Do you in fact have prepositions in Japanese? And if so, also simple ones like "in", "with", etc. Can you use any of those figuratively?


Nope, tell you the truth, Japanese doesn't have any prepositions but propositions(always placed after the word, like the _ago _in _he left the country three hours ago_). I guess I should be more specific about it.



> *風が木々の間をさっと通り抜けた*
> _kaze-ga kigi-no aida-wo satto too-ri nuke-ta_
> *Wind*-nom. *trees*-gen. *in between*-acc. *pass*(adverbial form, inf. too-ru to pass) *get away-ed*
> The wind blew pass(through) the trees.
> 
> *あるアイデアが彼の頭に閃いた*
> Aru idea-ga kare-no atama-ni hirame-i-ta
> *Some idea*-nom. *his*(gen.) *head*-*in*(to) *flash*-*ed*(past tense marker)
> Some idea flashed upon(through) his head.
> 
> *昨夜は徹夜で遊び倒した*
> Sakuya-wa tetsuya-de aso-bi tao-shi-ta
> *Last night*-topic marker *stayed-up night*-with(by) *play*(adverbial form, inf. aso-bu to play) *beat-ed*
> Last night we stayed up all night(through the night) playing the game.



Back to the point, _through _can be translated to many particles(or propositions) like に(to, in), で(by, with), から(from), を(acc.) etc. in many contexts.
We use each and every different words as we like to do in the sentence, in the place of _through_.


----------



## Anja.Ann

In Italian, "*per*" is used in many prepositional phrases (among these: place and cause/reason):

- Passeggio _per_ il parco = I walk _through_ the park
- _Per_ una brutta influenza, ho perso la festa = I missed the party _because of_ the flu.


----------



## Dib

Continued from post #21:



ThomasK said:


> I would like to know if you can use the same (or similar) preposition in your language to refer to *through *(_per _in Latin) and *because of, *maybe even to the agent in passive voice*.*



3) Sanskrit: No/Yes?

Probably I should also mention the situation in Sanskrit in order to present a clearer historical picture of the Indian end of the Indo-European family. Sanskrit actually has a cognate to Eng. through, Ger. durch, etc. in the form of "tirás", which governs the accusative case, like in Germanic. The meaning ranges over "through" ~ "across", e.g. Rigveda 3.27.13 "tirás támāṃsi darśatás" = "visible through the darknesses" describing fire. However, in many contexts, a simple instrumental case without any pre/postposition would be the correct choice, e.g. "mārgeṇa gacchati" = "he/she is going through the road".

In the sense of "due to"/"because of", "tirás" cannot be used, but an instrumental or ablative case is required, e.g. "varṣābhis/varṣābhyas nāśas" = "destruction by/due to the rains".

The agent of passive voice is always in instrumental case without any pre/postposition.


----------



## ThomasK

In case/... languages "due to"can be expressed using an instrumental case, I can  quite understand that but even this "through" can be expressed with an instrumental case is not so self-evident: in Latin you'd need a preposition as well. I could imagine a case expressing direction or maybe origin, but "through". What meanings can an ablative have in your language? (I am simply not familiar with this use of cases, that is all)

BUt what do you mean by "going through the road"? Along? This use of "through" is not clear to me. In general I understand something like "passing through [the darkness, the wood]", like penetrating to some extent and then leaving again, but n,ot really like "via", like you suggested in a previous contribution --- but with a road??? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Dib

ThomasK said:


> What meanings can an ablative have in your language? (I am simply not familiar with this use of cases, that is all)



My language (Bengali) doesn't have a morphological ablative case. It uses postpositions to express the related senses. However, I think, you are referring to Sanskrit here, which is the language I mentioned the ablative case for. In Sanskrit, ablative case primarily marks origin, i.e. it answers the question "from where/what/whom?" Of course, there are many secondary uses, e.g. cause, comparison, object of fear, etc.



> BUt what do you mean by "going through the road"? Along? This use of "through" is not clear to me. In general I understand something like "passing through [the darkness, the wood]", like penetrating to some extent and then leaving again, but n,ot really like "via", like you suggested in a previous contribution --- but with a road??? Thanks in advance.



Sorry, maybe I used the wrong preposition in English. I imagined, "through" simply means "moving inside something in a specific direction", entering and leaving were not on my mind. I'd associate that more with "across", I guess. But you are right, I meant something like "along the road", but I find "along" imprecise because (I feel) it is applicable even when you are not directly on the road, but just walking by the side of the road, e.g. on a strip of grass. So, more precisely, I meant "along and on the road". Maybe, a more idiomatic way of saying it in English would be "going down the road"?


----------



## bibax

_"going through (?) the road"_

In this case Czech also uses the simple instrumental case (cesta, fem. = road, way; instr. sing. cestou):
Šel cestou (i) necestou. = He was going "through" the road (and also) out of the road (lit. through no road).

Interestingly Ænglisc (Old English) had the instrumental as well: *hwȳ* (why) is an instrumental of *hwæt *(what);


----------

