Dear Word Detective: I am writing to you from the research department of a large magazine. We have a story that I am fact-checking in which the author states: “… a friend of mine told me that the origin of the word ‘forgive’ means to untie….” This kind of statement causes fact-checkers a lot of stress. Of course I am unable to verify this “fact” and am forced to go hunting on my own. Do you have any insight into the origin of the word “forgive?” — N. R.
Hmm. Odd. But this brings up a question of my own. I have always wondered how many layers, so to speak, fact-checkers are expected to plow through in search of “the truth.” In this case, for instance, you have an author who reports that a friend said that “forgive” originally meant “untie.” Let us presume that you verify that the author’s friend actually said that. So the statement by the author is true. You then have to worry whether the friend is right? Perhaps the friend read it in a book written by a fellow in Helsinki. Where do you stop? After all, if that open-ended approach were applied to the statements of politicians, newspapers would contain nothing but ads for lost pets.
In this case, being the helpful sort that I am, I can report that the author’s friend’s cousin’s landlord’s parrot, or whoever we’re talking about, is seriously misinformed. “Forgive” never meant “untie.” The root of “forgive” is the Latin word “perdonare,” meaning “to give completely, without reservation.” (That “perdonare” is also the source of our English “pardon.”)
When the Latin “perdonare” was adopted into the Germanic ancestor of English, it was translated piece-by-piece, making the result what linguists call a “calque” (from the French “calquer,” to trace or copy) a literal transliteration. “Per” was replaced by “for,” a prefix that in this case means “thoroughly,” and “donare” with “giefan” (“to give”). The result, “forgiefan,” appeared in Old English meaning “to give up, allow” as well as “to give in marriage.” In modern English, “forgive” has also taken on the meanings of “to pardon for an offense,” “renounce anger at” (“I forgive you for feeding bean tacos to my dog “) and “to abandon a claim on” (as in “forgive a debt”).
As to where your author’s friend’s “untie” theory might have come from, I catch a whiff of New Age psychobabble in that story. It’s easy to imagine some pop-happiness guru explaining that our anger and resentment are the “ties” that bind us, and that only by “forgiving” others can we be freed to chase butterflies through fields of daisies or whatever. Personally, I’ll believe it when I see it practiced by the IRS.
I agree with the above except I am a little more ‘forgiving’ about the ‘untie’ interpretation. As a Christian I am assured the Bible makes it very clear those we do not forgive we retain a hold over. It is only when we release forgivness that we release that person from our binding hold into God’s hands of mercy and Grace. In this sense we release people when we forgive, and ‘untie’ will do for me. It’s a good picture language demonstration of the power of forgivness. Hence the central importance of total forgiveness of others in Christian teaching. e.g. even in the Prayer it is a central issue, and many scriptures. God bless.
Remember that forgiving also releases the “forgivers” from ties of resentment and hatred that tie them to the those who have wronged them. In a sense we are released when we forgive, regardless of what is released in the forgiven….
Forgiveness is a great subject until it comes to PERSONALLY forgiving (thoroughly giving without reservation). Functionally, forgiveness unties us from the past and others from us but it is more than that. Forgiveness is thoroughly giving. i.e. It is absorbing the loss without reservation; hence, “giving without reservation.” God made us all to need others and be dependent upon each other. Unforgiveness ties us together in unhealthy (more depression after open heart surgeries, lower quality of life, etc.) psychological ways. Forgiveness not only sets others free and us… it not only absorbs the loss (which if it stopped here it would sound of victimization… it gives completely without reservation. It takes the initiative and gives. Now anyone reading this should begin to feel unable to do this when it comes to anything really worth the term. That is why we need to be forgiven ourselves which becomes the inspiration and power to forgive as we have been forgiven.
Although I am a fan of word studies, and in general I think people ought to do more of them before they go recklessly slinging terminology; in this case it seems that if one finds it exceedingly necessary to research the fine nuances of a word for a concept such as “forgiveness” maybe one is not emotionally or spiritually prepared to consider the option of forgiving. After all, can you have reservations about “giving without reservation?” Just saying…
Here’s a quote attributed to Lewis B. Smedes that speaks to Mike King’s comment: “To forgive is to set a prisoner free and to discover that the prisoner was you.”
My two cents: forgiveness is NOT a feeling but a behavior. It is a choice to act in a certain way toward someone who hurt you. You need not forget the hurt, but you can choose to forgive.
Thank you for your two cents!… They were very beneficial!
NOPE…none of the above…The word forgive means to “give as before”. In the example of the prisoner, it would mean to give the prisoner as he had it before…freedom (“free” to set “domicile” where desired “aka no restrictions in movement/locomotion”). In the personal sense in human interactions, forgiving a person is to “give” yourself to further interactions with the involved person in the same manner as you had “before” the occurrence of the “incident” that caused you grief. This does mean “releasing” the other person and giving them freedom to exist in your space and in interactions with you without the presence of the offending incidence in the space between you. What is interesting is that the word forget similarly means that you “get” it as before…the offending incidence no longer exists in your personal space, let alone in the interactive space between you and the other person.
I agree with Apu that forgive is to give as before, meaning perhaps, give attention too “as before”, give your love “as before” It is here that I would like to add something new to the understanding of forgiving. If we can “fore”-give this could be seen as pre-forgiveness and is a much easier way to release unnecessary stress. In scripture it says that a person should forgive seventy times seven in one day and this leads me to see that we should be in a pre-forgiveness state of being (ready willing and able) Its how I live my life and you can bet I experience less stress than the average person, less heartache and I never get into “unnecessary” arguments.
I’ll have to concur with Apu and Richard. Sometimes it helps not to dig too deeply if we want the true meaning of a word – that is if we truly intend to practice what we’re researching.
To for-give simply means to give before – to let go ahead of time.
This fits with what Jesus said about forgiving an offense seventy times seven. If we take this admonition in the traditional sense it would mean we’d have to let go of an offense 490 times. That not only sounds extremely stressful, it seems very unrealistic.
It would be much more realistic to take Jesus’ admonition on forgiveness as simply meaning; “not to take offense at all.”
The real lesson in forgiving an offensive person 500 times is that my heart learns not to take offense in the first place.
In other words, to forgive in its true sense means not to take up an offense, period.
Whether we realize it or not, the stress and the trauma that an offense has upon us is due entirely to our taking exception to what was done to us or to someone we love or something we value. If we didn’t take an offense there would be nothing to “forgive.”
When we refuse to take offense – we have in all truth fore-given our offender. If we let go ahead of time there is nothing to forgive after the fact. When we fail to “fore-give” we are left with the fallout of irreconsilable differences.
This definition is much closer to the meaning of the Greek word “aphiemi” used in the original text, which means “to let go, forsake, lay aside, leave alone, put away, omit.”
“Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive (aphiemi) him? As many as seven times? Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven….And out of pity for him the lord of that servant released him and forgave (aphiemi) him the debt.”
To put it simply – to forgive simply means to not take offense – to refuse to take to account, to let go of an offense ahead of time, to pre-omit the sin – to fore-give. If we keep it simple we can practice it – without the stress of having to deal with the traumatic after effects!
To fore-give is to be one who never takes offence at all
It is very interesting to read all of the above entries in my quest to understand the word, concept and act of forgiveness. I am looking at the word ‘for-’ as a prefix (i.e. away, off, apart), as in not receiving what is given. That is,to’forgo’ or decline the ‘gift’. This idea is reflected in a story I heard about the Buddha, when he told someone that he refused to accept their gift of anger. I think we can do this after the event in our imagination as well.
if you would like a really in-depth look at forgiveness, try here –
http://www.jesus-resurrection.info/definition-for-forgiveness.html
blessings,
austin
“Forgive” is untie in Aramaic/Syriac, “shbag”, that’s where your friend got that “forgive” means untie. But it only means so in Aramaic. The root of the word in English is well explained above as “per-donare”!
Though not a true root of forgive, my working definition has become “to not judge in the first place”. If I don’t judge, there is nothing for me to forgive. That’s easier said than done using a mind that constantly scans the world using a “friend or foe” filter. My penny…