exx is absolutely RIGHT!
Guerrilla is NOT a person, but a group of persons.
Can be the person or the adjective, but not the "organization", neither the other way round.
exx is absolutely RIGHT!
Guerrilla is NOT a person, but a group of persons.
Can be the person or the adjective, but not the "organization", neither the other way round.
Realmente, el destino del mundo depende, en primer lugar, de los estadistas y, en segundo lugar, de los intérpretes.
Trygve Halvdan Lie
Thanks, Sandra!Originally Posted by SandraT
well absolutely right and wrong then
it is that way in Spanish as far as I understand
but if Merriam-Webster says something it is true in English
even though it is misinterpreted in English it is used that way also in some other languages
I looked up in Longman too the definition same as Merriam-Webster
Bartleby is also another solid reference in English which supports you more and the s after the guerilla is not the plural in English
http://www.bartleby.com/81/7720.html
E. Cobham Brewer 1810–1897. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. 1898.
Gueril’la,
improperly Guerilla wars, means a petty war, a partisan conflict; and the parties are called Guerillas or Guerilla chiefs. Spanish, guer’ra, war. The word is applied to the armed bands of peasants who carry on irregular war on their own account, especially at such time as their Government is contending with invading armies.
“The town was wholly without defenders, and the guerillas murdered people and destroyed property without hindrance.”—Lessing: United States, chap. xviii. p. 676.
Originally Posted by kasa
That's really taking a mouth full!
I don't know how a word can be "true" in English if the word is Spanish and the definition of the word is quite clear and leaves no doubt in Spanish.
Surprising.
Did you look at the definition of the Spanish word I included in Post 10? It is completely clear and there is simply no way "Guerrilla" is a man, neither is there ANY way at all to interpret" guerrillero" as the organization .
In any case, if you wish to follow Miriam Webster's interpretation of the words, suit yourself.
well you already proved what it means in Spanish and I agree with you
all I was trying to say is sometimes some words may be misinterpreted by other languages as the orginal word differentiates in meaning somehow
Longman and Merriam Webster is two of the best English dictinories that you can find so if they put a definition like that across the word even it is misinterpreted than it can be used like that in English
...which reminds me , I actually wanted to write to the dictionary. I also think that Miriam Webster is really good. Let's see if I get an answer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)