Like engagement rings denote the engagement… Maybe it’s just English being its usual mess
In german it is “Ehe-Ring” which literally translates to marriage ring
It's called a wedding ring, but surely it should be called a marriage ring
Submitted 2 months ago by Mwallerby@startrek.website to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Comments
DarkMetatron@feddit.org 2 months ago
Mwallerby@startrek.website 2 months ago
French as well - le bague de mariage
thelsim@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
In Dutch it’s called a trouwring, which as a verb literally translates to wedding ring, but as a noun also to loyalty ring.
Which I find rather sweet.Mwallerby@startrek.website 2 months ago
Ooh neat, think that’s from the same root as troth/betrothal in English too, proto German fir truth & fidelity
josteinsn@lemmy.world 2 months ago
In Norwegian same thing: giftering, “the state of being married-ring”. Jeg er gift = i am married. It also means “I am poison”, though.
DarkMetatron@feddit.org 2 months ago
Is it then also the “state of being poisoned-ring”?
11111one11111@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You receive an engagement ring at your engagement and your wedding ring at your wedding. How is this difficult?
orcrist@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Maybe you’re confused because the etymology is not clear to you. I see the term “wedding ring” and I think it denotes that person A and person B are being wed to each other. Joined to each other. The ring symbolizes that joining. In other words, I don’t think the ring is named after the event. I think both the ring and the event are named after the verb. In which case it’s a very normal name.
Another interesting point is that in some cultures it’s quite common for people to get married months or years before they have a wedding. They can go to City Hall and get married, and then later when they have time and money they can schedule their wedding celebration party. If that’s the case, then the ring that you use for the first time at your wedding might be reasonably called the “wedding ring”.
feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 2 months ago
weddening
SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 2 months ago
Reminds me of an old Yakov Smirnoff routine. Espresso powder makes espresso, and milk powder makes milk. So what does baby powder make?
Mwallerby@startrek.website 2 months ago
Terrible coffee
tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Some people never even get “wedding rings” and just wear the fancy looking engagement rings forever.
That being said, wedding rings make use of the wed/wedded connotations. :shrug:
volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 2 months ago
While I don’t see the necessity in wearing a ring in the first place - yet I am a sucker for rings - what always gets me is having a fancy overpriced engagement ring that you’re supposed to wear for a short period of time and then a simple wedding ring that you’re supposed to wear forever.
Jikiya@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Wait, do you know women that stop wearing their engagement ring after they’re married? Every married woman I’ve met (that doesn’t have a hands based labor job) wears the engagement and wedding ring. All the women in my family have them soldered together some time after, so they don’t independently spin on the finger.
wildcardology@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You can blame the debeers company for the engagement ring. Just like you can blame Kellogg’s for the slogan “breakfast is the most important meal of the day”.
friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 2 months ago
A wearer of an engagement ring receives it when they become engaged, and a wearer of a wedding ring receives it when they wed. Seems pretty consistent to me.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Yeah, you get it at the event.
OP is acting like a birthday gift is only a birthday gift on someone’s birthday…
SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
This is backwards.
Marriage is more analogous to a birthday. (A personal change in status)
Wedding is more analogous to a birthday party (i.e. the event celebrating the change in status).
As you pointed out in your logic, the birthday gift isn’t really about the birthday party, just like the ring doesn’t commemorate the wedding celebration, it commemorates your new marital status.
Unless of course you are the kind of person that is so focused on the wedding celebration that you forget the reason why you are celebrating to begin with (spoiler: you are making a commitment and entering a new life stage).
I think OP is on to something.
snooggums@midwest.social 2 months ago
I dunno, doesn’t seem like toe rings and cock follow the same naming convention.
lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 months ago
Finger rings don’t, either. Not when they’re called that.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 months ago
“Enemy spotted. Engaging.” Puts on fancy diamond ring
Mwallerby@startrek.website 2 months ago
I get that, but also, it’s always seemed like the purpose of the ring is to signify the state of being, so engagement ring to show the state of being engaged, wedding ring shows the state of being married, or wed, I guess it works both ways
Not a strongly held view by any means 😆
sxan@midwest.social 2 months ago
Your logic makes sense. To OP’s point, though, you wear an engagement ring to show that you are engaged; a wedding ring to display you are married/wed. The argument for it being called when you receive it is weakened by the fact that most people remove their rings when an engagement is broken, or they get divorced. Or, they move the ring to a different finger, at which point it’s no longer an engagement or wedding ring, right? It’s just a ring.
If the rings were named after the event of reception, they’d still be called wedding and engagement rings even after a broken relationship. They’re “was” rings; ex-wedding-rings. No longer engagement rings.
So the more I think about it, the more I’m with OP - the rings represent a state, and so wedding rings should be called “marriage” rings to represent the state of being engaged/married, rather than the singular event of the giving.