# Rivers: fleuve / rivière



## Yendred

In French, "_un fleuve_" is a river which flows into the sea, and "_une rivière_" is a river which flows into another river (being itself _un fleuve _or _une rivière_).

For example, the _River Thames_ (UK) is a "_fleuve_" because it flows into the North Sea, and the _Missouri River_ (USA) is a "_rivière_" because it flows into the Mississippi River.

Does this distinction exist in other languages? Or another distinction concerning rivers? Or no distinction at all?


----------



## AndrasBP

As far as I know, no such distinction exists in Hungarian (_folyó_), Slavic (_reka _or similar forms) or Baltic (_upė_/_upe_). 

.

But which is the 'default' word for 'river' in French? It's _rivière_, isn't it?
Suppose you're travelling in a foreign country by car and you reach a river but you don't know anything about its geography, what do you call it?


----------



## Yendred

There is a default expression, when we don't know if it's a _fleuve _or a _rivière_: we say _un cours d'eau _(lit. a water stream), but it's more formal.
If we reach a river and don't know anything about its geography, I guess the most common would be to say "_une rivière_".



AndrasBP said:


> Slavic (_reka _or similar forms)



Yes I knew the Russian "рекa" from the song "Эй, ухнем" (known in English as _The Song of the Volga Boatmen_):
Эх ты, Волга, мать *река* (Oh you, Volga, mother river)
Широка и глубока (Large and deep)


----------



## ThomasK

Dutch: *stroom/ rivier* (but we seldom use "stroom" (stream) in that sense nowadays...)... I must say I had never realized the reason for the difference: I supposed it had to do with bigger or smaller. "Stroom" implies, in my view at least, a large river. But I checked and noticed that the distinciton is not made in Dutch. 
What we can say though is that *"stroom" is very often used in the figurative sense, not "rivier"*: "een stroom brieven", a pile/... of letters, "vluchtelingenstroom" implies a massive influx of refugees and is therefore a powerful metaphor potentially causing big emotions...


----------



## Nizo

In Esperanto, the most comprehensive printed monolingual dictionary (Plena Ilustrita Vortaro) uses the word *rivero* for both concepts. However, the most comprehensive online dictionary (Reta Vortaro) does make the same distinction as in French, using *riverego* for _fleuve_ (a river that flows into the sea) and *rivero* for _rivière_ (a river that flows into another river).


----------



## Yendred

Nizo said:


> *riverego* for _fleuve_ (a river that flows into the sea) and *rivero* for _rivière_ (a river that flows into another river).



Interesting thanks! As far as I could see, the suffix _-ego _means _large. _Obviously, _fleuves _are often larger than _rivières_, but there may be counter-examples 

The _fleuve Couesnon _is a coastal river flowing into the Channel sea, near the Mont-Saint-Michel:






And the _rivière __Saône_, flowing into the Rhône river in Lyon, is quite larger:


----------



## ThomasK

I have just added something to my contribution and while doing that came to think of* the use as metaphor. *I could imagine that one of the two or both is/are often used metaphorically. 

I know the expression "*roman fleuve*" for example. Always thought it had something to do with flowing, but I now notice it refers to the size first of all, the number of pages, or... ?


----------



## Perseas

Yendred said:


> In French, "_un fleuve_" is a river which flows into the sea, and "_une rivière_" is a river which flows into another river (being itself _un fleuve _or _une rivière_).


In Greek, both are _ποταμοί _(pl. of_ *ποταμός* _masc.). For a river that flows into another river, we also have a more specific term_, *παραπόταμος*, _which obviously derives from_ ποταμός _& the preposition _παρά. _In addition,_ παραπόταμος _is a calque (1859) from the German_ *Nebenfluss*._


----------



## Yendred

ThomasK said:


> I know the expression "*roman fleuve*" for example. Always thought it had something to do with flowing, but I now notice it refers to the size first of all, the number of pages, or... ?



Yes the nuance of size between _fleuve _and _rivière _is present in French by extension in a number of expressions, although the original definition is not based on size.



Perseas said:


> In Greek, both are _ποταμοί _(pl. of_ ποταμός _masc.)



Yes indeed, a word wich gave _hippopotamus_, literally "the horse of the river"


----------



## volo

Yendred said:


> I knew the Russian "рекa"


Bonjour, 
Pour pouvoir exprimer des oppositions dimensionnelles le russe fait souvent recours à des diminutifs. Dans le cas en question, ce sera le diminutif "*речка*", que l'on emploirerait pour parler d'un cours d'eau peu large et peu profond. Mais ce n'est pas le cas de Volga bien évidemment  ...
Река vs речка = fleuve vs rivière
Cela dit, on n'oubliera pas que "речка" se présente plutôt comme familier et ne s'utilise guère dans un registre formel (géographie, histoire).


----------



## Olaszinhok

[


volo said:


> Bonjour,
> Pour pouvoir exprimer des oppositions dimensionnelles le russe fait souvent recours à des diminutifs. Dans le cas en question, ce sera le diminutif "*речка*", que l'on emploirerait pour parler d'un cours d'eau peu large et peu profond. Mais ce n'est pas le cas de Volga bien évidemment ...




Bonjour,
Cela se passe aussi en italien (et dans d'autres langues), une langue très riche en diminutifs et augmentatifs. On a *fiume, *mot qui correspond à l'anglais _river_, mais on peut faire recours à des diminutifs: *fiumicello, fiumiciattolo *pour parler d'un cours d'eau peu large et peu profond. Si l'on veut se référer à de très petits cours d'eau, on peut utiliser: _*torrente, ruscello, rigagnolo*_, etc.


----------



## jazyk

I would say that Portuguese rio corresponds to both rivière and fleuve, but rivière could also be a tributário or afluente.


----------



## Yendred

jazyk said:


> rivière could also be a tributário or afluente



We have in French _tributaire_ and _affluent_ but these are used in reference to their relation to another river, whereas _rivière_ is self-sufficient.
As an example, I just quote the beginning of the Wikipédia article about the river Saône:
_La Saône est une rivière de l'est de la France, principal affluent rive droite du Rhône. _


----------



## AndrasBP

volo said:


> Pour pouvoir exprimer des oppositions dimensionnelles le russe fait souvent recours à des diminutifs. Dans le cas en question, ce sera le diminutif "*речка*", que l'on emploirerait pour parler d'un cours d'eau peu large et peu profond. Mais ce n'est pas le cas de Volga bien évidemment ...


Yes, but Russian dimensions are a bit different.  
Here's a picture of the river Oka, a tributary of the Volga. I don't think anyone would call it "речка".


----------



## Awwal12

volo said:


> Bonjour,
> Pour pouvoir exprimer des oppositions dimensionnelles le russe fait souvent recours à des diminutifs. Dans le cas en question, ce sera le diminutif "*речка*", que l'on emploirerait pour parler d'un cours d'eau peu large et peu profond. Mais ce n'est pas le cas de Volga bien évidemment  ...
> Река vs речка = fleuve vs rivière
> Cela dit, on n'oubliera pas que "речка" se présente plutôt comme familier et ne s'utilise guère dans un registre formel (géographie, histoire).


But the distinction is merely about the size, not about what the river flows into. Obviously, a small river may flow into the sea, as well as a large river may flow into an even larger one or, potentially, a lake. But, sadly, I don't speak French and may be missing something.


AndrasBP said:


> I don't think anyone would call it "речка".


No doubt in that.


----------



## Yendred

Awwal12 said:


> But the distinction is merely about the size, not about what the river flows into. Obviously, a small river may flow into the sea, as well as a large river may flow into an even larger one or, potentially, a lake.



Yes this is it. The mere distinction between _fleuve _and _rivière _is not the size but indeed where it flows into.


----------



## Circunflejo

In Spanish, río is used regardless of whether it ends (sea, lake or another river). There's afluente for a river that flows to another river but an afluente is a river after all. It _becomes _an afluente when you talk about them in relation with the other river.


----------



## Yendred

It seems that Swedish makes the same distinction as French between _fleuve _(_älv_) and _rivière _(_å_).
Any Swedish here to confirm this?


----------



## AndrasBP

Yendred said:


> It seems that Swedish makes the same distinction as French between _fleuve _(_älv_) and _rivière _(_å_).


I've just checked on Swedish Wikipedia and it says that the Danube is a _'flod'_.


----------



## nimak

Yendred said:


> In French, "_un fleuve_" is a river which flows into the sea, and "_une rivière_" is a river which flows into another river (being itself _un fleuve _or _une rivière_).



In *Macedonian* all rivers are called *река* (réka) _fem_.; *реки* (réki) _pl_.

But, there is a name for a stream or river that flows into a larger river (Not into a lake or sea!) - *притока* (prítoka) _fem_. The term is used only when you say that _"(River) A is prítoka of (river) B."_. Similar, but not same with the English definition of _tributary_.

Example:
*Треска е притока на Вардар.* (Tréska e prítoka na Várdar.)
lit. "Treska (_name of a river_) is _pritoka_ of Vardar (_name of a river_)."


----------



## Awwal12

That's likely pan-Slavic. Cf. Rus. приток (pritók):  "Кама - приток Волги" (the Kama is a tributary of the Volga).


----------



## Perseas

Yendred said:


> It seems that Swedish makes the same distinction as French between _fleuve _(_älv_) and _rivière _(_å_).
> Any Swedish here to confirm this?


I found this information:
_Rivers in Scandinavia north of Göta älv and Dalälven are named *älv*, south thereof *å* or *ström*. Rivers abroad are called *flod*. Smaller streams can be called *å, ström, bäck*._
älv - Wiktionary


----------



## Yendred

Thanks for the precision Perseas


----------



## merquiades

We have a size difference in English, *river* is bigger and wider, though it might be used generally for any *stream*.  A small more narrow river is a *creek*. It doesn't matter whether we're talking about the *main stream* or a* tributary*, a strict way of distinguishing if it heads to the ocean or another river*.*


----------



## Yendred

merquiades said:


> It doesn't matter whether we're talking about the *main stream* or a* tributary*, a strict way of distinguishing if it heads to the ocean or another river*.*



Would _main stream _be a good translation for the French _fleuve_? The question is: to which extent the expression _main stream _obviously refers to a water stream (as _fleuve_ does), or can refer without more context to broader concepts?
For example, would you naturally say the *Mississippi River* is a "main stream"?


----------



## merquiades

Yendred said:


> Would _main stream _be a good translation for the French _fleuve_? The question is: to which extent the expression _main stream _obviously refers to a water stream (as _fleuve_ does), or can refer without more context to broader concepts?
> For example, would you naturally say the *Mississippi River* is a "main stream"?


Yes, you could say the Mississippi is the main stream feeding into the Gulf of Mexico. The Ohio, the Miami and the Allegheny are its main tributaries.


----------

