7

In Swedish the word "Särskrivning" describes the incorrect splitting apart of compound words into individual words and the resulting change in meaning. An English example I can think of: groundhog vs. ground hog. The former is an animal, the latter a tasty meal when cooked.

Is there an equivalent English word or phrase for this concept?

Dave Carlile
  • 173
  • 5
    Well, I'd be tempted to call them splitting headaches.... – Dan Bron May 08 '16 at 12:40
  • 2
    It's something that's only occasionally done in English (since there aren't that many splits that would change meaning), so I doubt that one can find a recognizable term (though I suppose there may be an obscure one). – Hot Licks May 08 '16 at 12:55
  • That's kind of what I'm expecting the answer to be. Google sometimes translates the word as "split compound" depending on context. That's probably close enough, but doesn't seem quite right. – Dave Carlile May 08 '16 at 13:00
  • Not sure what the "concept" is. That a compound is greater than the sum of its parts? – TimR May 08 '16 at 14:31
  • Maybe "concept" isn't the right word since I only have a vague understanding that may be entirely wrong - but combining words in Swedish is seemingly very common and some people (in many cases older generations) can get very upset if you write the words separately when they're supposed to be together. The blog post Swedish Särskrivning is a Cultural Faux Pas is the best English discussion I can find at the moment. – Dave Carlile May 08 '16 at 15:17
  • Reading through the blog post should help you understand the most likely English perspective on this distinctively Swedish phenomenon - befuddlement. – silvascientist May 09 '16 at 01:33
  • This phenomenon is called misdivision and has produced such results as a newt for earlier an ewt, an umpire from earlier a numpire, and many others. – Anonym May 15 '16 at 00:22
  • In English splitting a compound word is more a matter of timing and rhythm of speech than the actual splitting of a written compound word. For example, a person might say the word 'waitingroom' with equal emphasis and timing on 'waiting' and 'room'. It sounds strange, as if a room is waiting for something to happen. But if the emphasis is on 'waiting' and a reduced weight on the word 'room', it's a room for waiting.I don't think there is a word to cover these shifts of emphasis. – user3847 Jun 05 '16 at 23:15
  • "What Microsoft Word does when I type in a fictional word" wouldn't be a suitable answer, would it? –  Jun 08 '16 at 16:31
  • For the purpose of enhancing my answer - is Särskrivning a verb or a noun? Would we call one of these a "Särskrivning" or the process of making them "Särskrivning"? –  Jun 08 '16 at 16:42
  • If I post this as a duplicate the Q will be automatically closed. I have what SE calls a "dupe hammer", or words to that effect. But this Q has been asked several times before: 1. Word for “No I in Team” 2. What is the name for a word that contains other words? 3. Is there a term for a word inside another word? – Mari-Lou A Jun 08 '16 at 17:14
  • Ground hog, as in "minced" (BrEng) hog meat? A type of burger? I don't think I have ever heard of that particular dish. – Mari-Lou A Jun 08 '16 at 17:19
  • Flying butter (butterfly), a bottle that is blue (bluebottle), a house that is green (greenhouse), a fork in an elevator (forklift), a father who is wonderful (grandfather) etc.. – Mari-Lou A Jun 08 '16 at 17:26
  • @Mari-LouA No, OP is still here. If you think my question is a duplicate of those then you're not even close to understanding my question and might want to re-read it again. – Dave Carlile Jun 08 '16 at 17:38
  • Well that's why I didn't post it as a duplicate, I in actual fact did re-read it.See my comment above. I think the questions are closely related though. You'll probably disagree. – Mari-Lou A Jun 08 '16 at 17:40
  • Yes, of course I do. ;) Your examples are about a word within a word. My question is about compound words, and a word that means not writing the compound word properly (and the Swedish disdain for not writing them properly). I can't even make a mental stretch to see how those two things are similar in any way, other than that they both involve words. But then we'd have to just have a single question available here if that is the standard for dups. :p – Dave Carlile Jun 08 '16 at 17:43
  • And ground hog... guess I've never had a pork burger, but surely such a thing exists. – Dave Carlile Jun 08 '16 at 17:45
  • 1
    @Anonym What you’re referring to is rebracketing or metanalysis, an entirely different thing. This is about open, closed, and hyphenated compounds—more specifically indicating the compoundness in an incorrect manner: writing ‘water fall’ instead of ‘waterfall’ or ‘wishingwell’ instead of ‘wishing well’. In Swedish, compounds are (nearly) always written closed, so the word that means to write them open has taken on the meaning of incorrectly writing them open. I don’t believe there is a word for that in English. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Mar 31 '18 at 01:36
  • See also https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/244523/what-mistake-is-made-when-words-are-incorrectly-split-into-two-different-words – Greybeard Mar 07 '20 at 18:40

3 Answers3

6

No, there is not an equivalent word since split compound words is the norm in English.

The compound-word-splitting is a hassle in Swedish because all nouns are either one word (rektor - principal), a hyphenated compound word (e-post - e-mail) or a compounded word (sjuksköterska - nurse).

The last example is a Swedish compound of sjuk (sick) and sköterska (carer). As one word it means nurse (a carer of the sick) but if you split it into two it means a sick carer.

In Swedish you can create new word by compounding them to change their meanings. However, splitting compounded words into smaller pieces can change their meaning or, in most cases, make them loose their meaning completely. E.g. a lorry truck driver would just be written as one compounded word in Swedish: lastbilsförare. Splitting last, bil(s) and förare into three pieces would not make any sense; they still have their separate meanings but it would be like listing words without any connection between them. It’s like someone would write “I’m a lorry, truck, driver” – you would probably get what they mean but it would be annoying reading texts like that. Or, like in the example above; is the person in question a carer of the sick (nurse) or a sick carer? Either that person stated their profession or their health status and profession, however, you can't always be sure if it's as the text says or a spelling mistake with some compounded words when they are split up.

The 's' in parentheses is put between some sounds in Swedish to make the compounded words flow better. This is known as "foge-s" (a binding letter s) in Swedish.

2240
  • 103
Sue
  • 76
  • This is partly true, but not entirely. Some compounds are always written closed in English, some always open, some always hyphenated, and some vacillate between the three options. It’s just as much an error in English to write water fall, foot ball, or note book as it would be in Swedish to write vatten fall, fot boll, or note(s) bok. I believe you’re right, though, that unlike in Swedish, English doesn’t have a word meaning to incorrectly write a compound open when it should be written closed. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Mar 31 '18 at 01:44
1

There's a thing called metanalysis which is similar. "An orange" should really be "a norange", from Spanish naranja.

Now while looking up the exact word I found "hamburger". Ham doesn't mean cured pork and burger doesn't mean "flat round thing" in this context; they allegedly originated in Hamburg, the German city. So you could consider "chicken burger" to be close (and a culinary abomination to boot).

P.S. It might be an urban myth, but there was supposed to be a company that made writing equipment, called "Pen Island". Their website implied something quite different...

BlokeDownThePub
  • 11
0

I suspect the closest word or phrase that exists in English would be misnomer, on the grounds that using a "compound" word as if it were separable with the same meaning would be an error.

For example, calling a pig laying on the ground a "groundhog" would be a misnomer. Similarly, calling the season-predicting rodent a "ground hog" would also be one. They are separate words/phrases and attempting to interchange them on apparent similarity is a misnomer.

However, I am not aware of any word or phrase that would also convey that implicit similarity.