# Cross out



## ThomasK

The previous made me wonder how you translate 'to cross out'. 

I know some translations: 
- _doorstrepen_ in Dutch  (to bar through, to line through')
- _schrappen_ also(which seems linked with _schrapen_, linked with 'to scrape')
- _barrer_ in French (barre being a kind of beam or stick, I think)
- _streichen_ in German (Streich being some kind of line, I believe)


----------



## Tjahzi

*Swedish* has _kryssa för/över/i_ depending on context/object.


----------



## apmoy70

In Greek:
A/«Διαγράφω» (ðia'ɣrafo); from the same Classical verb «διαγράφω» (dĭă''grāpʰō). Compound formed with the joining together of the prefix and preposition «διὰ» (dī'ă)-->_through, throughout_ + verb «γράφω» ('grāpʰō, 'ɣrafo in modern pronunciation)-->_to write_. PIE base *gerbʰ-, _to scratch_. «Διαγράφω» lit. _to delineate, draw a line through.
_B/ «Εξαλείφω» (eksa'lifo); from the same Classical verb «ἐξαλείφω» (ĕksă'leipʰō). Compound formed with the joining together of the prefix and preposition «ἐξ» (ĕks)-->_out of, from, upwards, completely, deprive of, without_ + verb «ἀλείφω» (ă'leipʰō)-->_anoint with oil, daub, plaster, besmear. _PIE base *leip-/*leibh-, _to baste, paste_. «Εξαλείφω» lit. _to plaster/wash over_, metaph. _wipe out, erase_. In modern language only the latter meaning has survived.  

[ð] is a voiced dental non-sibilant fricative
[ɣ] is a voiced velar fricative


----------



## bibax

Czech:

*škrtnouti, zaškrtnouti, přeškrtnouti, vyškrtnouti* (all perfective with various verbal prefixes; there are also imperfective counterparts);

The root *škrt-* from **skreb-* = to scrabe, to scribble.

The noun *škrt* means _stroke (of pen), expunction/cutout (in a text), cuts (in economics)_.


----------



## ThomasK

@Apmoy: Great again. Διαγράφω is then just like our doorstrepen,almost literally. And your «Εξαλείφω» must be the historically precursor of... Tipp-Ex (before the arrival of Word software of course). Now we can also use _deleten_, but only when crossing out on our computer screen... 

_(I wondered whether the 'aleipo' is used in some words we use in modern languages.)_

@Bibax: great as well, it is about the same as _doorstrepen_ again then. What do the prefixes mean? _Out_, etc. ?


----------



## bibax

za- = behind; zaškrtnout  = to tick off, to mark off;
pře- = across; přeškrtnout = to line through, to scratch off;
vy- = out, off; vyškrtnout = to delete (from a list);


----------



## Maroseika

Russian has the word of the same origin as the Czech - зачеркнуть.
In addition theres is (was - it is obsolete now) another word - _похерить_, meaning 'to mark or cross a text with the sign X' which was Russian letter х , named _хер_.  The word похерить is used even now, but in a wider sense - to put an end to smth., but has some additional vulgar connnotation, because _хер _is used since long ago as an euphemism to the Russian word consisting of 3 letters beginning with the same letter and meaning membrum virile.


----------



## ThomasK

(Well, speakers of Russian do have a lot of imagination. ;-))

But could you translatiterate, as I am not good at the vowels in Russian? (Is it _zagerkute_ and _poherite_?) Please also tell me what _po_ is in Russian.T_hrough_ by any chance ?


----------



## Tjahzi

Зачеркнуть - technically [zat͡ɕer'knutʲ], but in reality [zɐt͡ɕɪr'knutʲ] due to vowel reduction.

Похерить - technically [pa'xʲerʲitʲ], but in reality [pɐ'xʲerʲɪtʲ] due to vowel reduction.

_По_ has a number of translation. Wiktionary lists the following:


With accusative case
 

up to
till
 

With dative case
 

along
over
on
according to
_indicates the direct object of some verbs of striking or hitting_
_indicates repetition of time_
_indicates distribution_
 

With locative case
 

after
for

Regarding the three-letter word so gracefully avoided by Marosika, I've written a brief description of it below (in white) which can be marked and read if one pleases.

The word in question is _хуй_ [xuj] and translates to _penis, dick, prick _etc. It belongs to the vocabulary of Russian profanity usually referred to as _mat _(мат). It is considered extremely obscene and as such its is prohibited in media and public speech and frowned upon by ordinary speakers (which explains Maroseika's relucantcy to use it).


----------



## ThomasK

Is your Russian as good as your Swedish? I am impressed. What meaning would you think of when reading Похерить ?


----------



## Tjahzi

No, not at all. Although I've studied it, my "active" ability is very limited. However, I have a thorough interest in linguistic typology and hence know "a little about a lot" and additionally am very interested in phonology.

As such, I would interpret по-хер-ить as _perfective marker-{obscene word mentioned above}-infinitive marker_ and hence as "something profane". I don't recall having seen the word before.


----------



## ThomasK

Perfective: yes, like _er_- in German, _uit_- in Dutch, etc. Yes, quite probable! Thanks!


----------



## Maroseika

ThomasK said:


> But could you translatiterate, as I am not good at the vowels in Russian? (Is it _zagerkute_ and _poherite_?)


Зачеркнуть - zachirkn*u*t'
Похерить - pah*e*rit'



> Please also tell me what _po_ is in Russian.T_hrough_ by any chance ?


Adverb "po" has a lot of meanings and functions (but not ever _through_). In this case it makes perfective verb похерить from the imprefective херить.



Sorry, have not noticed much more detailed comment of Tjahzi.


----------



## Rallino

Turkish:

*...* _[Genitive]_ *üstünü* */ üzerini çizmek* : _*to draw a line on / above ...*_

*... *_[accusative]_ *karalamak* (_lit._ to darken ...) *:  to scrape ...*


----------



## Maroseika

Tjahzi said:


> As such, I would interpret по-хер-ить as _perfective marker-{obscene word mentioned above}-infinitive marker_ and hence as "something profane". I don't recall having seen the word before.



I have to make a little comment. When the word _похерить _first appeared, хер was absolutely literary word, and up to 1918 it was the "official" name of the letter "х" (after 1918 it has changed to _ха _(ha)). Хер is reckoned to be a shortened херувим (cherub).
I'm not sure when exactly euphemistic sense of _хер _appeared, but it has definately widely spread only after 1918.


----------



## sakvaka

*Finnish*.

_ruksata yli _= to cross over (_ruksi_ = eg. 'X')
_viivata yli _= to line over (_viiva _= eg. '--------')


----------



## ThomasK

Is there a link with _risti_ then, Sakvaka? 

Viivaa will be like doorstrepen then. The yli is 'over' then? Do you have some kind of phrasal verbs then?


----------



## sakvaka

_Yli_ is 'over'. You could say they are phrasal verbs (indeed rare, but they exist). Notice the similarity with _kryssa över_, and make a wild guess about the source of these structures.  (_Again one good example of what kind of influence we have got from Germanic languages!_)

_Ruksi_ and _risti_ aren't related, and unfortunately I don't know the etymological source.


----------



## Orlin

Bulgarian uses 3 pairs of words basically meaning "to strike a line through":
1. (да) зачеркна/зачерквам (da zacherkna/zacherkvam - perf./imperf.); 
2. (да) зачертая/зачертавам (da zachertaya/zachertavam - perf./imperf.); 
3. (да) задраскам/задрасквам (da zadraskam/zadraskvam - perf./imperf.).
The first 2 derive from черта/cherta - a line, and the last from the verb драскам/draskam - basically "to draw lines", usually without a concrete purpose or not forming a meaningful picture.
The verbs are used basically interchangeably and it's not important if the wrong text is crossed with a single line or with 2 crossing lines.

P. S.: We sometimes (usually informally) use the expression тегля кръста/teglya krasta - to draw the cross for crossing out something wrong or figuratively for eliminating or cancelling an option or a plan.


----------



## jazyk

In Portuguese: cruzar, from cruz (cross), or riscar (from risco, scratch).


----------



## merquiades

In Spanish, the verb is "tachar" 
Tachar una palabra - Cross out a word

This verb also has another meaning: to brand someone as something

I'm not sure of the origin, but it may come from "tacha" - blemish, defect

I believe in italian, it's "cancellare", same origin as cancel


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks, everyone. Just wondering: it does not really mean deleting, does it (as that is not what I mean) ?


----------



## Orlin

ThomasK said:


> Thanks, everyone. Just wondering: it does not really mean deleting, does it (as that is not what I mean) ?


In Bulgarian deleting is not meant. The meanings of what I mentioned are:
1. Physically crossing parts of a written text with (a) line(s) to declare it wrong or invalid.
2. Figuratively: eliminating or cancelling an option or what one has decided or planned.


----------



## ThomasK

Great, that is precisely what I hoped !


----------



## apmoy70

ThomasK said:


> Thanks, everyone. Just wondering: it does not really mean deleting, does it (as that is not what I mean) ?


Unfortunately in Greek, both versions suggest deletion/removal. What did you mean?


----------



## ThomasK

No worry, I think only the 'aleifo' suggests deleting as I meant it here: making it look as if it had never been there. Remember the Tipp-Ex trick: that is wiping out ('away'), which is different from crossing out...


----------



## Tjahzi

Hm, it didn't occur to me, but none of the Swedish ones directly mean "deletion" or "removal", but rather "exclusion" at most.


----------



## ThomasK

You are referring to the kryssa phrasal verbs, don't you. Well, I would not be astonished if they just meant the same as in Dutch: _barrer_, 'stripe through', so that everyone can see it. 

Just by the way: in my local lemish dialect I heard children say something like* 'dood doen', to make dead,* when they meant crossing out. That is great - or I like it at least - as it implies that the underlying metaphor is that words are (like) living things _(is that an oxymoron?),_ and that 'killing' them makes them harmless...


----------



## Tjahzi

Yes, I was. Considering I wasn't overly elaborative in my first post, here is some additional information:

_Kryssa över - _to cross over through the act of drawing an "x" over (so that it extends beyond its borders) a word or symbol (or theoretically something bigger).

_Kryssa i_ - to fill a box (existing for that very purpose) with an "x" (theoretically without extending its boundaries, but considering the box is made to be filled (or not) a sloppily made "x" going beyond the borders does is acceptable).

_Kryssa för_ - similar to the above, with the difference being that it requires no box (rather, it requires for it to be _no_ box), but the essential part is marking something, for instance objects on a list, with an "x". The "x" is normally placed beside rather than over (as was the case in the first of these entries) the object in question.

Additionally, when applying the first one, _kryssa över_, it's also possible (maybe even preferable in order to distinguish it from the latter two) to use _stryka över_, which can be described like this.

Notes: 
_Över _is an adverb/preposition that translates to English _over._
_I _is an adverb/preposition that translates to English _in.
För _is an adverb/preposition whose meaning is broad, translating to English _for, by, over_ _(etc.)_.


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks for the addditions: thsoe would indeed be translated as _doorkruisen_ (SWE _över_) -- but that is equally uncommon for _doorstrepen_ (_stryka över_) -- _aankruisen_ or _aanvinken_ ('to finch on', because in the tick we recognize a bird, the finch ;-)), not *_invinken_.


----------



## Tjahzi

Well, Swedish always put a lot of emphasis of the "final destination/outcome" of the verb. As such, when entering a room, one goes _into in_ _the room_ where _in_ is mandatory in order to in some redundant way mark that the verb has resulted in the subject now being _in_ _the room_. Similarly, the cross is either _in _the box_, over _the text/symbol and _för _denotes that something has been singled out.

As such, these also have their corresponding adjectives: _ikryssad, förkryssad, överkryssad/överstruken_ (where, as one can see, the preposition interestingly enough has been just prepositioned again).

For the record, are you aware of this lexicon? I occasionally use it with fairly good results.


----------



## ThomasK

I think I understand, but could you give me examples? We might have something similar in Dutch, but I suppose we should not focus on that here. Maybe you could illustrate it using the verbs we have been discussing here... 

_Do we need to be/ do/ have _lagom _in order to use the dictionary ? ;-) Thanks !_


----------



## francisgranada

Hungarian:

_áthúzni_ (lit. "to draw over")
_kihúzni_ (lit. "to draw out")
_keresztül húzni_ (lit. "to draw across")


----------



## ThomasK

Great, but 'draw' in the meaning of _pull_ or of _dessiner_ (as in 'drawing')? And when do you use the one and the other? 

'Across' : is there a link to a cross in that prefix ? _(See the other thread I started)_


----------



## Tjahzi

Concerning my previous examples (to which I dedicated an independent thread, as I'm sure you've noticed), we can now conclude that which of the verbs to choose depends on whether the pencil mark is _in _a box or _over_ a "piece of text" at the completion of the action.


----------



## francisgranada

(If this question is for me ... )



ThomasK said:


> Great, but 'draw' in the meaning of _pull_ or of _dessiner_ (as in 'drawing')? And when do you use the one and the other?


 
*draw* in the sense of "draw a line with a pen/pencil ..." (not delete nor pull)

_*áthúzni*_ is the most general (correcting errors or so)
_*kihúzni*_ rather indicates that the word, phrase, line etc. has not to be there (in the list or so).
*keresztülhúzni* is perhaps more "strong" or explicit than _áthúzni_ 



> 'Across' : is there a link to a cross in that prefix ? _(See the other thread I started)_


 
Yes, cross is *kereszt* in Hungarian

(_keresztülhúzni_ does not mean "to draw a cross", but "to draw across")


----------



## ThomasK

I see, but that is what I meant. On the other hand: by drawing a cross across, we cross out in Dutch ! ;-)



Tjahzi said:


> Concerning my previous examples (to which I dedicated an independent thread, as I'm sure you've noticed), we can now conclude that which of the verbs to choose depends on whether the pencil mark is _in _a box or _over_ a "piece of text" at the completion of the action.


Is there a link with the verbs of motion, you mean?


----------



## Tjahzi

Well, yes, since the cross/mark _moves_ into the box/onto the text...


----------



## ThomasK

Yes, I see, but really, that reminds me of German - but.. go and see at your 'motion' thread !


----------



## Nizo

In Esperanto, *elstreki* or *forstreki*.  The verb _streki_ means to draw a line with a single movement of a pen or pencil.  The prefix _el, _as used here, equates to the English concept "out," while the prefix _for_ means "away."


----------

