In essence, it’s a combination of verbessern (“to improve”) and verschlimmern (“to make worse”). Here, then, is a verb that is able to express the idea of something simultaneously improving and worsening. Think about it!
Ver- is one of the most elusive prefixes in German, and historically it’s actually two or three prefixes collapsed into one, as explained here and here.
For simplicity’s sake, let us just say that it indicates doing or becoming what the stem refers to, often with a negative connotation.
German is full of such ineffable terms. Two of my favorites are “Schadenfreude” (“joy or pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others”) and “Fahrvergnügen” (“joy or pleasure derived from driving”).
Now, if you really want to blow your mind away, try to think of a German word for the joy or pleasure derived from the good fortune of others (discussion here) or contemplate a German word for the ability to sit in one place without moving for long periods of time (“Sitzfleisch”)
Better still, try to figure out what “Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz” means.
As Mark Twain once wrote, ”Some German words are so long that they have a perspective.”
—
When you search for the reason why ver is such an incredible mess you’ll soon find out that it is actually 3 prefixes, which just fused into one because people mumbled too much. The 3 existed in Latin, in old Germanic languages and in ancient Greek. And they still exist today. In English there are 4 now: per, pre, pro and for(e). And sometimes, only sometimes… the connection between all those and ver actually shows… . Vergessenmeans to forget. Verschreiben means to prescribe. Verlängern means to prolong.
But for the most part the knowing about this relation is totally worthless because, in fact, the 3 English prefixes are very messy too. They do not by any means represent clear cut fleshed out concepts. Take prolong, prohibit and product… whatever the pro adds here… it certainly doesn’t add the same idea to both verbs. Or what about prescribe and proscribe. Why do the words mean what they mean? Why not the other way around? And it is not only like that in English. I believe that also in the Roman languages those prefixes are a little blurry.
The reason for all this is that all those prefixes go back to one single Indo-European root … the root *per.
This one root is the base for all of them… pre, per, pro, for(e), ver, some instances of pri (prime, price or principle,.. ) and also the German word für and vor.
Wow. So this root was really incredibly productive and all kinds of concrete and abstract meanings were derived from it. The original idea however is rather basic: beyond some sort of boundaries.
In the post on Erfahrung we’ve already encountered that idea. We said that the word experience which has the idea of leaving your village in it. You exit your perimeter. This is one application for the basic idea of the root… the going beyond boundaries. Seems like this concept is an integral part of what humans do or how the see the world. At least this would be an explanation why this one tiny root could make such a career. It was adopted, altered, shifted and interpreted in all kinds of ways. I mean… just think about how many different words you know that have this root in them. It is crazy.
Anyway… so this original idea is actually incredibly helpful for ver. But we have to see it as a very abstract concept and words might not be the best way to frame that, because they’re too limited. So instead of words let’s try with an image. This is basically my interpretation of the Indo-European root … I’ll call it
“the essence of ver”.
/\ -------/- | / | | / | | / | | | ---------
Now, I promised that we can explain all vers with it it. And the one we just learned is actually incredibly simple to fit in….
There once was a little village called… “Circle”. Outside stretched a wild forest beyond the horizon. Little Sam and little Pete, two boys of 10 and 12 years, had never left the fence without their mother. And even then they didn’t go far into the forest. “The forest is a dangerous place.”,mom always told them, “the forest lion will eat you.” But being boys, Sam and Pete got bored inside the village. They felt ready for an adventure. So one day, they packed up their little wooden spears and snuck away. The best hunters of the village spent the following days forging the forest. But they could not find the two boys. The whole village mourned the loss. But then, it was almost a week later, Sam and Pete walked up to the wooden gate. Their leather clothes were torn, they were dirty and Pete was limping. But around their neck was hanging a tooth, a tooth of a forest lion and the 2 couldn’t look any more proud. “Lion tooth or no lion tooth… going into the forest alone was wrong of you?”, the mom said and tried to hide her relief. “We couldn’t find you. You must have been far away.”, the hunter said. “Hmmm… looks like they’re young men now.”, the old wise chieftain said.
Now you’re asking, why I am telling fairy tales here… what I am trying to illustrate is in what ways you can interpret the basic idea of ver… the going beyond boundaries. It can be a wrong.. for example if you go beyond the “boundaries” of spelling… but that is only wrong by convention.
And how can we ever explore if all we do is stay on well trodden paths? Going beyond a boundary can be wrong.Leaving the village was wrong because mom told them not to. But going beyond a boundary can also lead to new experiences, it can mean change, transformation. They left as young boys and came back as young men who had hunted down a forest lion.
And, last but not least then lastly, from the perspective of the village… the boys were just away.
And those are the 3 main ways we can interpret the basic idea of ver… the going beyond a boundary. It can be wrong, it can mean change and it can mean simply being away.
And the edges between those are blurry. Der Dampf means vapor, verdampfen is to vaporize… that is change because water turns to vapor, but it is also away because the water will be gone. Verkleiden meansto disguise (by means of clothing)… that ischange, but it is also wrong because it is not you’re usual way of dressing and it is even away because people can’t recognize you anymore.
So… all those 3 ideas, that seem pretty different do in fact have something in common… and this common ground is ver.