Attacks in Paris

I shudder whenever I heard WW1 being called 'the Great War' - it killed millions in the most atrocious of ways, on both sides- and served no purpose at all, none

Well if you had said it was your DGS who didn't understand , instead of saying how you felt, a lot of misunderstanding might have been avoided.

TBH I think our role is to educate our DGC not to dumb down our own use of language because of their lack of understanding. I am puzzled why you claimed you didn't understand the use of the word when it was your 6 year old DGS who needed the explanation.

Very interesting rose- had never seen this at the time.

Yes, Alea- quite obviously this is how I explained it to grandson- but it was him wo said that it seemed really strange to call it 'Great' as it was just so terrible and killed so many.

Tricia

To answer your question. I didn't.

Aren't most primary school children in the UK, certainly England spending some classroom time this year covering both wars? My two have taken part in some wonderful projects and understand why the Great War was called the Great War. There are many new books, for 6-10 year olds published too.
It may be a part of the same initiative to offer all older children the opportunity to visit the war graves in Europe.

Very worrying. Much more so than how people interpret the word 'great'.

Anya. I've read this. I've read that they will do it by shear numbers. It's possible, with what's happening in Europe now.

due to its more modern interpretation

there is - or was - a thread about words changing in meaning over the years wasn't there?

'Great War' was the most commonly used name for the First World War at the time, although 'European War' was also sometimes used. As the first pan-European War since Napoleon, 'Great' simply indicated the enormous scale of the conflict, much as we might today talk of a 'great storm' or a 'great flood'. However, the term also had moral connotations. The Allies believed they were fighting against an evil militarism that had taken hold in Germany. 'Great War' carried echoes of Armageddon, the biblical Great Battle of Good and Evil to be fought at the end of Time (there was indeed a battle at Megiddo, the site of Armageddon, in September 1918). It was therefore sometimes referred to as 'the Great War for Civilisation'. Although 'Great War' remained in use after the conflict was over, the moral connotations and implications that it had been 'a war to end all wars' fell away as the prospect grew in the 1930s of a second world war.

Sorry to go on, granjura I thought the extra bit about Armageddon was worth posting.

Saying 'that's great' as meaning that something is wonderful is a very modern interpretation of the word.
Similar to 'that's cool' not actually meaning low in temperature etc

We know you didn't!!

I never mean any harm btw

The answer to your question is emphatically NO! The word meant very big, (like a GREAT Dane dog, which means large, not brilliant!!) enormous, all encompassing, and to suggest otherwise is just complete rubbish! No one now or then would consider millions of dead people and so much suffering as some sort of lark to puff out your chest and boast about. FGS!!!

And if Granjura's 6 year old DGS or indeed anybody's DGC asks "Why was it called the Great War, Granny?" it is quite easy to say that "Great " means big and it was at the time the biggest war anybody had ever ecperienced.
QED

Never - I reiterate at my peril, I know - was the term 'Great War' used with any connotation of triumphalism. I have never heard it used by my generation or that of my parents. Let's give it a rest.

Confusion reigns...yet again!

Goodness only knows!! You'd have to ask a young person!! I suppose it just morphed into meaning, wonderful, amazing, out of this world, terrific, by default!!! I think you can tell in what context it's being used by the subject matter of a conversation, article or whatever, and I think when referring to war it is pretty obvious which definition is being used!!!!!!

Oops I've missed out a page and the discussion is now on name changing.

Ignore my last post as it seems irrelevant now.

There are those Muslims who wish for a non-violent approach to a global caliphate and who are taking steps to achieve their stated aim. This actually frightens me more than the neoliths of IS - if that isn't an insult to neolithic man.

Well, how did it get changed round then? You can't do that with just a typing error.

Sorry to go on about it, but it's weird!

I have no problem with WW1 being referred to as The Great War, any more than the Great Fire or The Great Plague, or The kings Great Matter in the 16th century! it just means gigantic, enormous, vast, all consuming. The alternative meaning of Great, is a relatively new interpretation, as a definition of this word and has nothing to do with the original meaning of 'Great' when it was first applied to WW1 by grandparents(ours!!)

Despite your '39 years in the UK and with a British Degree in Modern languages and many years as a translator' there do seem to be certain English words that you have trouble with, granjura...and then want to insist that we don't use them!

The Great War has been known as such for a lot longer than any of us has been alive, and if I want to refer to it as that I shall.

So if I come back as GranMerlot everyone will assume I'm having an extra large one.

lol no- that namechange would have been pretty stupid- don't you think jingl

Oh, so you didn't go off in a huff and then come back with a slightly different name in the hope that no one noticed gj?

Roses- after 39 years in the UK and with a British Degree in Modern languages and many years as a translator- yes I do, thanks (I know you meant no harm) - and yet, it always struck me as a shocking and unfortunate adjective to use, due to its more modern interpretation. It certainly confused out grandson (who is indeed grand in so many ways), and he did aks when he was about 6 why that war was called 'Great'.

Naughty corner for you rosesarered