I have no idea what German words these holocaust deniers argue about – that would be more relevant – but David glosses over philological reality a bit when he claims that it’s silly to talk as if “exterminate” could be used to mean “expel or exile.” That is exactly what the Latin root means (at least its primary meaning), as anyone with a high school Latin knowledge can figure out. It’s not used that way in modern English, but then again the Nazis weren’t speaking modern English.
Not to defend the deniers, but this isn’t quite as nonsensical as David makes it out to be, or at least it doesn’t seem to be. (Again, I think the German would be more relevant – why was the English word brought up at all?)
I’m sure the article uses the English word because this is The Straight Dope, not The Jounal of Holocaust Studies. And the very fact that it is English, and that the word “exterminate” is an English, not a Latin, word, means that only the English meaning applies. Moreover, German rarely uses words of Latin origin, outside of Roman history and the international scientific vocabulary, and Nazi German even less.
Oh, and by the way… It is never wise to rely on high-school Latin. The contemporary English sense of “exterminate” was born by “exterminare” in Late Latin.
However, now that the issue has been raised, perhaps it would be as well to give the word, or words, of the original German, to settle the matter.
I wasn’t “relying on high-school Latin,” but a master’s degree in Latin, thank you very much. I just said that high school Latin was all it would have taken to uncover the fact that “exterminate” itself provides, in its etymology, an example of ambiguity between “destroy” and “drive out.”
A point which nothing you’ve said challenges in any way.
BTW, a little googling leads me to the following URL:
which tells me that the relevant word is “ausrotten,” that the denier in question is David Irving, and that while you could make a similar etymological argument about the meaning of “ausrotten” being associated with “driving out,” contemporary usage and indeed Hitler’s own usage confirm that any other reading of it than “kill/destroy” is hopelessly tendentious.
Thanks for your contribution, though. Really helpful, polite, friendly, and enlightening.
Easy does it, ejh. Your first post is easily (mis)read as John does, that you are relying on high school Latin. And I’m reading your comments back as sarcasm, which seems (a) uncalled for and (b) out of place in this forum. If you want to be snide, please go to the forum called BBQ Pit and you unleash as much sarcasm as you want. Relax. Seems to me you’re overreacting.
OK, now, you raise an interesting etymological point, and I appreciate you finding the additional information that backs up David’s initial statement and overturns that point.