Why Third 'Reich'? Why is 'reich' not translated when 'third' is? What is the English synonym of reich?












93















Why is Nazi-Germany commonly referred to as "The Third Reich" in English? Why is reich not translated when Dritten ("third") is?



And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?



Austria (Republik Österreich), Norway (Kongeriket Norge) and Sweden (Konungariket Sverige) all have reich (or the Norwegian/Swedish corresponding etymology related word) in their name and they all have English translations of their name.










share|improve this question




















  • 11





    'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

    – Mitch
    Feb 16 at 16:24






  • 55





    You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Feb 16 at 16:27






  • 27





    Why is Soviet not translated?

    – michael.hor257k
    Feb 16 at 18:33






  • 42





    I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 16 at 22:50






  • 10





    Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

    – jamesqf
    Feb 17 at 4:14
















93















Why is Nazi-Germany commonly referred to as "The Third Reich" in English? Why is reich not translated when Dritten ("third") is?



And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?



Austria (Republik Österreich), Norway (Kongeriket Norge) and Sweden (Konungariket Sverige) all have reich (or the Norwegian/Swedish corresponding etymology related word) in their name and they all have English translations of their name.










share|improve this question




















  • 11





    'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

    – Mitch
    Feb 16 at 16:24






  • 55





    You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Feb 16 at 16:27






  • 27





    Why is Soviet not translated?

    – michael.hor257k
    Feb 16 at 18:33






  • 42





    I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 16 at 22:50






  • 10





    Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

    – jamesqf
    Feb 17 at 4:14














93












93








93


9






Why is Nazi-Germany commonly referred to as "The Third Reich" in English? Why is reich not translated when Dritten ("third") is?



And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?



Austria (Republik Österreich), Norway (Kongeriket Norge) and Sweden (Konungariket Sverige) all have reich (or the Norwegian/Swedish corresponding etymology related word) in their name and they all have English translations of their name.










share|improve this question
















Why is Nazi-Germany commonly referred to as "The Third Reich" in English? Why is reich not translated when Dritten ("third") is?



And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?



Austria (Republik Österreich), Norway (Kongeriket Norge) and Sweden (Konungariket Sverige) all have reich (or the Norwegian/Swedish corresponding etymology related word) in their name and they all have English translations of their name.







idioms translation german






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Feb 19 at 18:25









Azor Ahai

3,88521434




3,88521434










asked Feb 16 at 14:57









EmLiEmLi

572125




572125








  • 11





    'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

    – Mitch
    Feb 16 at 16:24






  • 55





    You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Feb 16 at 16:27






  • 27





    Why is Soviet not translated?

    – michael.hor257k
    Feb 16 at 18:33






  • 42





    I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 16 at 22:50






  • 10





    Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

    – jamesqf
    Feb 17 at 4:14














  • 11





    'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

    – Mitch
    Feb 16 at 16:24






  • 55





    You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Feb 16 at 16:27






  • 27





    Why is Soviet not translated?

    – michael.hor257k
    Feb 16 at 18:33






  • 42





    I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 16 at 22:50






  • 10





    Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

    – jamesqf
    Feb 17 at 4:14








11




11





'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

– Mitch
Feb 16 at 16:24





'Why' is a difficult question in general. It could be because that's just how one English journalist decided to do it.

– Mitch
Feb 16 at 16:24




55




55





You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Feb 16 at 16:27





You’ve kind of answered your own question, I suspect: Reich is not that easy to translate into English. It means a kingdom, a realm, an empire, a state, a nation… there isn’t really a good, existing word in English that captures its meaning fully, so at some point, people just borrowed the German word. ‘Third’, on the other hand, is trivial to translate, and there’s little reason not to.

– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Feb 16 at 16:27




27




27





Why is Soviet not translated?

– michael.hor257k
Feb 16 at 18:33





Why is Soviet not translated?

– michael.hor257k
Feb 16 at 18:33




42




42





I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

– Justin Lardinois
Feb 16 at 22:50





I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but it's not uncommon for loanwoads to have a narrower meaning in English than they do in their source language. A similar example is salsa, which just means "sauce" in Spanish, but in English refers to specific kinds of sauces that originate from the Spanish-speaking world.

– Justin Lardinois
Feb 16 at 22:50




10




10





Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

– jamesqf
Feb 17 at 4:14





Why are other German words, like Kaiser and Fuhrer, not translated?

– jamesqf
Feb 17 at 4:14










11 Answers
11






active

oldest

votes


















90














Although English historians have defined Reich as being a strictly German concept of sovereign rule, in the German language itself it means "Empire". In English, we speak of the Holy Roman Empire; in German, it is the HRR or "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation".



Wiktionary quotes Busching, who in 1762 explained Reich as a German understanding of "Eminence", from the Latin Regnum, rather than an Empire or a Realm as other cultures would understand it.



One could see it as a word used in English, Russian, Portuguese and many other languages as a designation for any kind of German kingdom, empire or absolutism, similar to how one would address a foreigner according to their origin, e.g. Senor Martinez, Monsieur Aragon.
Compare it to how many cultures, including the Germans, also use the word "Commonwealth" or "Soviet Union", despite the fact that Bavaria had formed its own Union of Soviets, the Räterepublik, during the Weimar Republic.



If you're interested in knowing when the word "Third Reich" came into usage, it is worth noting that during Fascist Germany, the country's official name was Das Deutsche Reich, and in the USA and UK it was usually referred to as Germany, Hitler's Germany, Berlin, Reich or, the most popular term, Nazi Germany.



(Sources: Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany, headlines about Germany in newspapers like the NY Times or the Times, the Daily Mail's Lord Rothermere)



In Germany itself, the idea of a third Reich stemmed from the 19th century, where it was a popular philosophical theme in literature and theology. Writers like Johannes Schlaf, who wrote "Das Dritte Reich" in 1899, or the German translator of Ibsen's "The Emperor and the Galilean", popularized the idea of the imminent arrival of a thousand years of Christianity (a kind of positive apocalypse), which would follow a third "Reich". And they would quote Paul the Apostle and various saints, to make it clear that the third Reich would follow the heretic lex naturalis and the lex mosaica.



Nazi propagandists exploited this in their articles, making it sound as if the saints had had some sort of epiphany about Hitler and the Nazis.
In other words, the Third Reich began as an abstract idea of a Christian revolution, but was assumed by Nazi writers in order to bolster Hitler's popularity and justify the drastic and bloody decisions that the Fascist government was making.
In one of the earliest examples of the Third Reich being mentioned outside of Germany, Major Strasser in the film Casablanca talks about the Third Reich as if it was just the beginning to a kind of paradisaical future or of a fourth Reich.



After 1945, the term was used exclusively to associate only to the unsuccessful reign of Fascism in Germany, and it ceased as a philosophical or theological idea in German literary circles.






share|improve this answer



















  • 14





    Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

    – Joe Stevens
    Feb 17 at 12:18






  • 13





    Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

    – Jim Wrubel
    Feb 17 at 15:51






  • 5





    When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

    – Chris W.
    Feb 17 at 16:04








  • 5





    Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

    – Alex Yu
    Feb 17 at 19:31






  • 5





    This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

    – AnoE
    Feb 19 at 11:44



















45














To complement R Mac's answer, Reich entered the English lexicon in this use in the 18th and 19th centuries, so by the time the Third Reich rose in the 1930s, the word would have needed no translation.



Thomas Carlyle, who wrote a history of Friedrich the II of Prussia in 1865, refers to Reich 27 times. The term is applied to both the Holy Roman Empire and to Fredrick the Great's kingdom of Prussia.



The Oxford English Dictionary entry for Reich collects several more examples from 19th century periodicals, principally the Times, including this one from 1852:




Times 6 July 6/4 It was the old court of appeal of the Reich, remarkable in its time, even among other courts, for its majestic slowness of procedure.




So this word would have been readily identified with Germanic centers of power from the medieval period to the present.



Since this word serves principally as a reference, it'd be inaccurate to gloss it as a single word like realm. It's more of a linguistic borrowing, like Khanate, where the form of government and the culture of origin are both bound up within the word. Referring to a non-Mongol/Turkic entity as a Khanate would invite comparison to actual Khanates, just like referring to a non-Germanic entity as a Reich would invite comparison to the HRE/Prussia/Germany (before the 20th century) and to Nazi Germany today.






share|improve this answer

































    19














    Interestingly, the "First Reich" is the Holy Roman Empire. So the concept of the "Reich" as understood by speakers of German transcended language and cultural shifts over a very long period of time, from 962 CE through 1945 CE.



    You can therefore think of "Reich" as similar to the English "realm" but different. The "Reich" is what German speakers view to be the empire of the German state, with authority derived from a unified "German people" within the empire instead of from a religious deity or a monarchy. As such, a Reich is distinctly German. I assume that since the 1940s every English speaking person on the planet had learned that the word "Reich" essentially means "Realm of Germany", there was never any need to translate it. And translating it would have lost some meaning, since there's no clean way to articulate this concept in English.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2





      This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

      – Oldbag
      Feb 16 at 19:46






    • 14





      @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

      – Anyon
      Feb 16 at 20:01








    • 12





      @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

      – Marcel Krüger
      Feb 16 at 23:39






    • 3





      @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

      – Michael W.
      Feb 18 at 18:32






    • 2





      The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

      – R Mac
      Feb 19 at 0:46



















    12














    The use of the German word "Reich" clearly conveys that one is referring to Germany (or at least to a German-speaking country). If one were to replace "Reich" by "Empire" (or a similar English-language alternative), one would have to refer to "The Third German Empire" (or similar), whereas using the German word "Reich" automatically conveys that it is Germany (or another German-speaking country) that is being referred to, thus removing the need for the extra word.



    In other words, The Third Reich is more compact than The Third German Empire", while automatically conveying that it is Germany that is being referred to.






    share|improve this answer


























    • I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

      – choster
      Feb 20 at 17:48





















    7














    I think as to why "Reich" was retained is because of a simple matter of productivity and suitability of the word "Reich;" i.e., the economy of the German word itself warrants retention.



    "Third Reich" has contexts:



    a) It is related to Germany - because of "Reich"



    b) It is related to XX century history - because of "Third"



    c) It just sounds "cool"



    It's just an economy of words: with "Third Reich" we have a lot of contextual information condensed into just two words.



    Comparison with another languages



    Russian:
    As a native Russian speaker, I can inform you that the same is in Russian language: "Das Dritte Reich" is translated as "Третий Рейх"( "Рейх" is transliteration of "Reich")



    I don't know how native English speakers can understand "The Third Realm," but for Russian speaking, "Третий Мир," can be easily confused with concept of Third Rome.



    Again, it's merely a question of economy.



    Two words clearly defined in their historical and geographical context (and "Reich" sounds cool in Russian - and English - too).



    Japanese(and Chinese?): Although if we look further on East we can find that in China and Japan translation 第三帝国 is used (but kanji themselves are embodiment of economy, so my "theory of economy of words" still works)



    Swedish: Tredje_riket - looks like translation.



    Edit: Clarification from @prof-falken:




    Swedish is (and was so even more before and during WWII) so culturally close to Germany, and linguistically is still, that "rike" and "reich" are not only cognates, but dare I say understood in the same way between the languages.




    Slovak: Tretia ríša Aha! And in Slovak we have an ambiguity! (Altghough I suppose that for most Slovaks it's not a problem to mix German words with ease).



    (Please do not take too seriously my hypothesis. I would be glad to entertain contention if I seem to be incorrect).






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

      – TimLymington
      Feb 17 at 21:31






    • 2





      I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

      – Emil Jeřábek
      Feb 18 at 9:45






    • 1





      @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

      – trolley813
      Feb 18 at 10:32






    • 3





      As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

      – Kapten-N
      Feb 18 at 12:25






    • 1





      OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

      – Vladimir F
      Feb 19 at 20:07



















    4














    Could not some of the usage be based on the Shirer bestseller “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” ?



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















    • No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

      – Brock Adams
      2 days ago





















    1














    Not a direct answer, but I'm surprised none of the other comments or answers mentioned that English indeed does have a direct cognate to the German "Reich," as can be seen in the word "Bishopric":



    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bishopric



    This word is still in use in place of "diocese" by various protestant denominations rejecting the latin-derived word in favor of a Germanic one.



    So lack of suitable cognates alone can't be the answer. Although it would have been interesting if we had half-translated with the other remaining halves, leaving us with the "dritte ric," rather than "third Reich."






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.




























      -3














      I am going to suggest a rather simplistic reason for this that has little to do with language : space.



      In journalism space is money. You (and your editor) will always try and cram as much as possible into the smallest space they can, generally because more free space means more advertising revenue (a little simplistic, but space=money is they idea here). A single letter can push a line of text onto a new printed line, eating into column inches available elsewhere.



      An editor faced with "Dritten Reich" will happily accept "Third" as being shorter than Dritten, not to mention that Dritten conveys no information to the English speaking reader. Reich, on the other hand, has no simple translation (and it's clear from the more informed answers here that even agreeing one would be difficult). So those five letters can stay as they are (from the editor's point of view). Not only does "reich" convey the German connection clearly, but the combination (as noted by @Alex-Yu) does sound "cool".



      So it may simply boil down to the constant desire to save space in printed news of the day and the soundbite being a good result.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      • This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

        – Chris W.
        Feb 19 at 18:32






      • 1





        I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

        – StephenG
        Feb 20 at 0:03











      • perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

        – Chris W.
        Feb 20 at 20:45



















      -3















      And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?




      That's why.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















      • 2





        This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

        – Cascabel
        Feb 20 at 23:18



















      -4














      IMHO is is wrong to call Nazi controlled Germany the Third Reich because the Nazis liked to call it the Third Reich, hoping to gain some of the glory associated with that phrase in Germany according to Chris W.'s answer. Of course they never officially changed the name to Third Reich, so Third Reich is also inappropriate because of not being official.



      So I think instead that it should be called Germany when describing it as a country and a nation, and Nazi Germany, Nazi controlled Germany, Nazi infested Germany, Nazi contaminated Germany, etc., etc. when describing the Nazi rule of Germany.



      Similarly the previous regime should not be called the Weimar Republic or Weimar Germany, because that was a Nazi habit.



      The official name of the German state was Deutsches Reich (German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1871 to 1943, and Grossdeutsches Reich (Greater German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1943 to 1945. The republic in 1919 took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous German Empire of 1871-1918, and the Nazis in turn took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous republic in 1933.



      There was direct continuity from 1871-1945. So another and third reason not to call Nazi ruled Germany the Third Reich is because Nazi run Germany was actually still the Second Reich. And I am not certain whether, or for how long, or to what degree, the present Federal Republic of Germany was or is considered to be a continuation of the Second Reich. And if the Federal Republic of Germany is not a continuation of the Second Reich that would make it the true Third Reich, and thus calling Nazi Germany the Third Reich would be legitimizing their stealing the term.



      In any case the Nazis were jumping the gun by calling their rule the Third Reich.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















      • 2





        The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

        – Peter Shor
        Feb 19 at 17:57





















      -5














      From my point of view, "the third Reich" is a lame or poor translation of "das dritte Reich". It is an half done work and an half badly done one.



      A translation with a correct rendering of the pathos of the expression "das dritte Reich" would be "the third German Empire" with the explicit upper case to "German" and "Empire" when it isn't mendatory in English.



      The expression "the third Reich" only survived out of lazyness from fast english speaking journalists.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 3





        The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

        – Peter Shor
        Feb 17 at 22:59











      • @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

        – Till
        Feb 18 at 11:23











      • @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

        – EmLi
        Feb 18 at 12:05






      • 1





        The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

        – Peter Shor
        Feb 18 at 13:35








      • 4





        Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

        – mama
        Feb 18 at 14:43










      protected by Robusto Feb 20 at 21:10



      Thank you for your interest in this question.
      Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



      Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














      11 Answers
      11






      active

      oldest

      votes








      11 Answers
      11






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      90














      Although English historians have defined Reich as being a strictly German concept of sovereign rule, in the German language itself it means "Empire". In English, we speak of the Holy Roman Empire; in German, it is the HRR or "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation".



      Wiktionary quotes Busching, who in 1762 explained Reich as a German understanding of "Eminence", from the Latin Regnum, rather than an Empire or a Realm as other cultures would understand it.



      One could see it as a word used in English, Russian, Portuguese and many other languages as a designation for any kind of German kingdom, empire or absolutism, similar to how one would address a foreigner according to their origin, e.g. Senor Martinez, Monsieur Aragon.
      Compare it to how many cultures, including the Germans, also use the word "Commonwealth" or "Soviet Union", despite the fact that Bavaria had formed its own Union of Soviets, the Räterepublik, during the Weimar Republic.



      If you're interested in knowing when the word "Third Reich" came into usage, it is worth noting that during Fascist Germany, the country's official name was Das Deutsche Reich, and in the USA and UK it was usually referred to as Germany, Hitler's Germany, Berlin, Reich or, the most popular term, Nazi Germany.



      (Sources: Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany, headlines about Germany in newspapers like the NY Times or the Times, the Daily Mail's Lord Rothermere)



      In Germany itself, the idea of a third Reich stemmed from the 19th century, where it was a popular philosophical theme in literature and theology. Writers like Johannes Schlaf, who wrote "Das Dritte Reich" in 1899, or the German translator of Ibsen's "The Emperor and the Galilean", popularized the idea of the imminent arrival of a thousand years of Christianity (a kind of positive apocalypse), which would follow a third "Reich". And they would quote Paul the Apostle and various saints, to make it clear that the third Reich would follow the heretic lex naturalis and the lex mosaica.



      Nazi propagandists exploited this in their articles, making it sound as if the saints had had some sort of epiphany about Hitler and the Nazis.
      In other words, the Third Reich began as an abstract idea of a Christian revolution, but was assumed by Nazi writers in order to bolster Hitler's popularity and justify the drastic and bloody decisions that the Fascist government was making.
      In one of the earliest examples of the Third Reich being mentioned outside of Germany, Major Strasser in the film Casablanca talks about the Third Reich as if it was just the beginning to a kind of paradisaical future or of a fourth Reich.



      After 1945, the term was used exclusively to associate only to the unsuccessful reign of Fascism in Germany, and it ceased as a philosophical or theological idea in German literary circles.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 14





        Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

        – Joe Stevens
        Feb 17 at 12:18






      • 13





        Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

        – Jim Wrubel
        Feb 17 at 15:51






      • 5





        When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

        – Chris W.
        Feb 17 at 16:04








      • 5





        Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

        – Alex Yu
        Feb 17 at 19:31






      • 5





        This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

        – AnoE
        Feb 19 at 11:44
















      90














      Although English historians have defined Reich as being a strictly German concept of sovereign rule, in the German language itself it means "Empire". In English, we speak of the Holy Roman Empire; in German, it is the HRR or "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation".



      Wiktionary quotes Busching, who in 1762 explained Reich as a German understanding of "Eminence", from the Latin Regnum, rather than an Empire or a Realm as other cultures would understand it.



      One could see it as a word used in English, Russian, Portuguese and many other languages as a designation for any kind of German kingdom, empire or absolutism, similar to how one would address a foreigner according to their origin, e.g. Senor Martinez, Monsieur Aragon.
      Compare it to how many cultures, including the Germans, also use the word "Commonwealth" or "Soviet Union", despite the fact that Bavaria had formed its own Union of Soviets, the Räterepublik, during the Weimar Republic.



      If you're interested in knowing when the word "Third Reich" came into usage, it is worth noting that during Fascist Germany, the country's official name was Das Deutsche Reich, and in the USA and UK it was usually referred to as Germany, Hitler's Germany, Berlin, Reich or, the most popular term, Nazi Germany.



      (Sources: Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany, headlines about Germany in newspapers like the NY Times or the Times, the Daily Mail's Lord Rothermere)



      In Germany itself, the idea of a third Reich stemmed from the 19th century, where it was a popular philosophical theme in literature and theology. Writers like Johannes Schlaf, who wrote "Das Dritte Reich" in 1899, or the German translator of Ibsen's "The Emperor and the Galilean", popularized the idea of the imminent arrival of a thousand years of Christianity (a kind of positive apocalypse), which would follow a third "Reich". And they would quote Paul the Apostle and various saints, to make it clear that the third Reich would follow the heretic lex naturalis and the lex mosaica.



      Nazi propagandists exploited this in their articles, making it sound as if the saints had had some sort of epiphany about Hitler and the Nazis.
      In other words, the Third Reich began as an abstract idea of a Christian revolution, but was assumed by Nazi writers in order to bolster Hitler's popularity and justify the drastic and bloody decisions that the Fascist government was making.
      In one of the earliest examples of the Third Reich being mentioned outside of Germany, Major Strasser in the film Casablanca talks about the Third Reich as if it was just the beginning to a kind of paradisaical future or of a fourth Reich.



      After 1945, the term was used exclusively to associate only to the unsuccessful reign of Fascism in Germany, and it ceased as a philosophical or theological idea in German literary circles.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 14





        Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

        – Joe Stevens
        Feb 17 at 12:18






      • 13





        Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

        – Jim Wrubel
        Feb 17 at 15:51






      • 5





        When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

        – Chris W.
        Feb 17 at 16:04








      • 5





        Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

        – Alex Yu
        Feb 17 at 19:31






      • 5





        This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

        – AnoE
        Feb 19 at 11:44














      90












      90








      90







      Although English historians have defined Reich as being a strictly German concept of sovereign rule, in the German language itself it means "Empire". In English, we speak of the Holy Roman Empire; in German, it is the HRR or "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation".



      Wiktionary quotes Busching, who in 1762 explained Reich as a German understanding of "Eminence", from the Latin Regnum, rather than an Empire or a Realm as other cultures would understand it.



      One could see it as a word used in English, Russian, Portuguese and many other languages as a designation for any kind of German kingdom, empire or absolutism, similar to how one would address a foreigner according to their origin, e.g. Senor Martinez, Monsieur Aragon.
      Compare it to how many cultures, including the Germans, also use the word "Commonwealth" or "Soviet Union", despite the fact that Bavaria had formed its own Union of Soviets, the Räterepublik, during the Weimar Republic.



      If you're interested in knowing when the word "Third Reich" came into usage, it is worth noting that during Fascist Germany, the country's official name was Das Deutsche Reich, and in the USA and UK it was usually referred to as Germany, Hitler's Germany, Berlin, Reich or, the most popular term, Nazi Germany.



      (Sources: Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany, headlines about Germany in newspapers like the NY Times or the Times, the Daily Mail's Lord Rothermere)



      In Germany itself, the idea of a third Reich stemmed from the 19th century, where it was a popular philosophical theme in literature and theology. Writers like Johannes Schlaf, who wrote "Das Dritte Reich" in 1899, or the German translator of Ibsen's "The Emperor and the Galilean", popularized the idea of the imminent arrival of a thousand years of Christianity (a kind of positive apocalypse), which would follow a third "Reich". And they would quote Paul the Apostle and various saints, to make it clear that the third Reich would follow the heretic lex naturalis and the lex mosaica.



      Nazi propagandists exploited this in their articles, making it sound as if the saints had had some sort of epiphany about Hitler and the Nazis.
      In other words, the Third Reich began as an abstract idea of a Christian revolution, but was assumed by Nazi writers in order to bolster Hitler's popularity and justify the drastic and bloody decisions that the Fascist government was making.
      In one of the earliest examples of the Third Reich being mentioned outside of Germany, Major Strasser in the film Casablanca talks about the Third Reich as if it was just the beginning to a kind of paradisaical future or of a fourth Reich.



      After 1945, the term was used exclusively to associate only to the unsuccessful reign of Fascism in Germany, and it ceased as a philosophical or theological idea in German literary circles.






      share|improve this answer













      Although English historians have defined Reich as being a strictly German concept of sovereign rule, in the German language itself it means "Empire". In English, we speak of the Holy Roman Empire; in German, it is the HRR or "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation".



      Wiktionary quotes Busching, who in 1762 explained Reich as a German understanding of "Eminence", from the Latin Regnum, rather than an Empire or a Realm as other cultures would understand it.



      One could see it as a word used in English, Russian, Portuguese and many other languages as a designation for any kind of German kingdom, empire or absolutism, similar to how one would address a foreigner according to their origin, e.g. Senor Martinez, Monsieur Aragon.
      Compare it to how many cultures, including the Germans, also use the word "Commonwealth" or "Soviet Union", despite the fact that Bavaria had formed its own Union of Soviets, the Räterepublik, during the Weimar Republic.



      If you're interested in knowing when the word "Third Reich" came into usage, it is worth noting that during Fascist Germany, the country's official name was Das Deutsche Reich, and in the USA and UK it was usually referred to as Germany, Hitler's Germany, Berlin, Reich or, the most popular term, Nazi Germany.



      (Sources: Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany, headlines about Germany in newspapers like the NY Times or the Times, the Daily Mail's Lord Rothermere)



      In Germany itself, the idea of a third Reich stemmed from the 19th century, where it was a popular philosophical theme in literature and theology. Writers like Johannes Schlaf, who wrote "Das Dritte Reich" in 1899, or the German translator of Ibsen's "The Emperor and the Galilean", popularized the idea of the imminent arrival of a thousand years of Christianity (a kind of positive apocalypse), which would follow a third "Reich". And they would quote Paul the Apostle and various saints, to make it clear that the third Reich would follow the heretic lex naturalis and the lex mosaica.



      Nazi propagandists exploited this in their articles, making it sound as if the saints had had some sort of epiphany about Hitler and the Nazis.
      In other words, the Third Reich began as an abstract idea of a Christian revolution, but was assumed by Nazi writers in order to bolster Hitler's popularity and justify the drastic and bloody decisions that the Fascist government was making.
      In one of the earliest examples of the Third Reich being mentioned outside of Germany, Major Strasser in the film Casablanca talks about the Third Reich as if it was just the beginning to a kind of paradisaical future or of a fourth Reich.



      After 1945, the term was used exclusively to associate only to the unsuccessful reign of Fascism in Germany, and it ceased as a philosophical or theological idea in German literary circles.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Feb 16 at 19:12









      Chris W.Chris W.

      99319




      99319








      • 14





        Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

        – Joe Stevens
        Feb 17 at 12:18






      • 13





        Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

        – Jim Wrubel
        Feb 17 at 15:51






      • 5





        When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

        – Chris W.
        Feb 17 at 16:04








      • 5





        Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

        – Alex Yu
        Feb 17 at 19:31






      • 5





        This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

        – AnoE
        Feb 19 at 11:44














      • 14





        Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

        – Joe Stevens
        Feb 17 at 12:18






      • 13





        Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

        – Jim Wrubel
        Feb 17 at 15:51






      • 5





        When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

        – Chris W.
        Feb 17 at 16:04








      • 5





        Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

        – Alex Yu
        Feb 17 at 19:31






      • 5





        This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

        – AnoE
        Feb 19 at 11:44








      14




      14





      Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

      – Joe Stevens
      Feb 17 at 12:18





      Also worth mentioning that in German, the British Empire is referred to as the Britisches Reich, or Britisches Weltreich (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britisches_Weltreich).

      – Joe Stevens
      Feb 17 at 12:18




      13




      13





      Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

      – Jim Wrubel
      Feb 17 at 15:51





      Also the German word for the nation of France is Frankreich.

      – Jim Wrubel
      Feb 17 at 15:51




      5




      5





      When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

      – Chris W.
      Feb 17 at 16:04







      When it comes to Frankreich, Britisches Reich, Österreich, Osmanisches Reich, etc., these still refer to the historically political make-up of these countries. Only until relatively recently in modern history has Austria and France stopped being empires. Then again, some countries are still called a "reich" in German if they are so much as a kingdom (Königreich).

      – Chris W.
      Feb 17 at 16:04






      5




      5





      Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

      – Alex Yu
      Feb 17 at 19:31





      Wikipedia article Third Rome also states: "Nazi Germany used the term Drittes Reich (meaning "Third Realm" or "Third Empire"), as successor of the first realm (HRE) and the second realm (the German Empire)". It sounds especially hillarious for Russian-speaking because Russian imperialists used "Third Rome" several centuries before German nazies birthed term "Third Reich"

      – Alex Yu
      Feb 17 at 19:31




      5




      5





      This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

      – AnoE
      Feb 19 at 11:44





      This answer seems to answer the question "What was the Third Reich?" (as in 'concepts' and such), not so much "Why was the term 'Reich' not translated." The German language used and uses the word "Reich" for plenty of other areas - i.e., Königreich, Kaiserreich, Tierreich, Pflanzenreich, Weltreich... and the usage as Deutsches Reich goes back to the dark ages (~960ish) with the HRRDN. To me, it seems completely plausible that the reason "Reich" is not translated in english is the same as any other word (Kindergarten, Rucksack, ...) which may have completely linguistic explanations...

      – AnoE
      Feb 19 at 11:44













      45














      To complement R Mac's answer, Reich entered the English lexicon in this use in the 18th and 19th centuries, so by the time the Third Reich rose in the 1930s, the word would have needed no translation.



      Thomas Carlyle, who wrote a history of Friedrich the II of Prussia in 1865, refers to Reich 27 times. The term is applied to both the Holy Roman Empire and to Fredrick the Great's kingdom of Prussia.



      The Oxford English Dictionary entry for Reich collects several more examples from 19th century periodicals, principally the Times, including this one from 1852:




      Times 6 July 6/4 It was the old court of appeal of the Reich, remarkable in its time, even among other courts, for its majestic slowness of procedure.




      So this word would have been readily identified with Germanic centers of power from the medieval period to the present.



      Since this word serves principally as a reference, it'd be inaccurate to gloss it as a single word like realm. It's more of a linguistic borrowing, like Khanate, where the form of government and the culture of origin are both bound up within the word. Referring to a non-Mongol/Turkic entity as a Khanate would invite comparison to actual Khanates, just like referring to a non-Germanic entity as a Reich would invite comparison to the HRE/Prussia/Germany (before the 20th century) and to Nazi Germany today.






      share|improve this answer






























        45














        To complement R Mac's answer, Reich entered the English lexicon in this use in the 18th and 19th centuries, so by the time the Third Reich rose in the 1930s, the word would have needed no translation.



        Thomas Carlyle, who wrote a history of Friedrich the II of Prussia in 1865, refers to Reich 27 times. The term is applied to both the Holy Roman Empire and to Fredrick the Great's kingdom of Prussia.



        The Oxford English Dictionary entry for Reich collects several more examples from 19th century periodicals, principally the Times, including this one from 1852:




        Times 6 July 6/4 It was the old court of appeal of the Reich, remarkable in its time, even among other courts, for its majestic slowness of procedure.




        So this word would have been readily identified with Germanic centers of power from the medieval period to the present.



        Since this word serves principally as a reference, it'd be inaccurate to gloss it as a single word like realm. It's more of a linguistic borrowing, like Khanate, where the form of government and the culture of origin are both bound up within the word. Referring to a non-Mongol/Turkic entity as a Khanate would invite comparison to actual Khanates, just like referring to a non-Germanic entity as a Reich would invite comparison to the HRE/Prussia/Germany (before the 20th century) and to Nazi Germany today.






        share|improve this answer




























          45












          45








          45







          To complement R Mac's answer, Reich entered the English lexicon in this use in the 18th and 19th centuries, so by the time the Third Reich rose in the 1930s, the word would have needed no translation.



          Thomas Carlyle, who wrote a history of Friedrich the II of Prussia in 1865, refers to Reich 27 times. The term is applied to both the Holy Roman Empire and to Fredrick the Great's kingdom of Prussia.



          The Oxford English Dictionary entry for Reich collects several more examples from 19th century periodicals, principally the Times, including this one from 1852:




          Times 6 July 6/4 It was the old court of appeal of the Reich, remarkable in its time, even among other courts, for its majestic slowness of procedure.




          So this word would have been readily identified with Germanic centers of power from the medieval period to the present.



          Since this word serves principally as a reference, it'd be inaccurate to gloss it as a single word like realm. It's more of a linguistic borrowing, like Khanate, where the form of government and the culture of origin are both bound up within the word. Referring to a non-Mongol/Turkic entity as a Khanate would invite comparison to actual Khanates, just like referring to a non-Germanic entity as a Reich would invite comparison to the HRE/Prussia/Germany (before the 20th century) and to Nazi Germany today.






          share|improve this answer















          To complement R Mac's answer, Reich entered the English lexicon in this use in the 18th and 19th centuries, so by the time the Third Reich rose in the 1930s, the word would have needed no translation.



          Thomas Carlyle, who wrote a history of Friedrich the II of Prussia in 1865, refers to Reich 27 times. The term is applied to both the Holy Roman Empire and to Fredrick the Great's kingdom of Prussia.



          The Oxford English Dictionary entry for Reich collects several more examples from 19th century periodicals, principally the Times, including this one from 1852:




          Times 6 July 6/4 It was the old court of appeal of the Reich, remarkable in its time, even among other courts, for its majestic slowness of procedure.




          So this word would have been readily identified with Germanic centers of power from the medieval period to the present.



          Since this word serves principally as a reference, it'd be inaccurate to gloss it as a single word like realm. It's more of a linguistic borrowing, like Khanate, where the form of government and the culture of origin are both bound up within the word. Referring to a non-Mongol/Turkic entity as a Khanate would invite comparison to actual Khanates, just like referring to a non-Germanic entity as a Reich would invite comparison to the HRE/Prussia/Germany (before the 20th century) and to Nazi Germany today.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Feb 17 at 22:34









          V2Blast

          17029




          17029










          answered Feb 16 at 18:03









          TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin

          4,175724




          4,175724























              19














              Interestingly, the "First Reich" is the Holy Roman Empire. So the concept of the "Reich" as understood by speakers of German transcended language and cultural shifts over a very long period of time, from 962 CE through 1945 CE.



              You can therefore think of "Reich" as similar to the English "realm" but different. The "Reich" is what German speakers view to be the empire of the German state, with authority derived from a unified "German people" within the empire instead of from a religious deity or a monarchy. As such, a Reich is distinctly German. I assume that since the 1940s every English speaking person on the planet had learned that the word "Reich" essentially means "Realm of Germany", there was never any need to translate it. And translating it would have lost some meaning, since there's no clean way to articulate this concept in English.






              share|improve this answer



















              • 2





                This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

                – Oldbag
                Feb 16 at 19:46






              • 14





                @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

                – Anyon
                Feb 16 at 20:01








              • 12





                @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

                – Marcel Krüger
                Feb 16 at 23:39






              • 3





                @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

                – Michael W.
                Feb 18 at 18:32






              • 2





                The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

                – R Mac
                Feb 19 at 0:46
















              19














              Interestingly, the "First Reich" is the Holy Roman Empire. So the concept of the "Reich" as understood by speakers of German transcended language and cultural shifts over a very long period of time, from 962 CE through 1945 CE.



              You can therefore think of "Reich" as similar to the English "realm" but different. The "Reich" is what German speakers view to be the empire of the German state, with authority derived from a unified "German people" within the empire instead of from a religious deity or a monarchy. As such, a Reich is distinctly German. I assume that since the 1940s every English speaking person on the planet had learned that the word "Reich" essentially means "Realm of Germany", there was never any need to translate it. And translating it would have lost some meaning, since there's no clean way to articulate this concept in English.






              share|improve this answer



















              • 2





                This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

                – Oldbag
                Feb 16 at 19:46






              • 14





                @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

                – Anyon
                Feb 16 at 20:01








              • 12





                @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

                – Marcel Krüger
                Feb 16 at 23:39






              • 3





                @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

                – Michael W.
                Feb 18 at 18:32






              • 2





                The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

                – R Mac
                Feb 19 at 0:46














              19












              19








              19







              Interestingly, the "First Reich" is the Holy Roman Empire. So the concept of the "Reich" as understood by speakers of German transcended language and cultural shifts over a very long period of time, from 962 CE through 1945 CE.



              You can therefore think of "Reich" as similar to the English "realm" but different. The "Reich" is what German speakers view to be the empire of the German state, with authority derived from a unified "German people" within the empire instead of from a religious deity or a monarchy. As such, a Reich is distinctly German. I assume that since the 1940s every English speaking person on the planet had learned that the word "Reich" essentially means "Realm of Germany", there was never any need to translate it. And translating it would have lost some meaning, since there's no clean way to articulate this concept in English.






              share|improve this answer













              Interestingly, the "First Reich" is the Holy Roman Empire. So the concept of the "Reich" as understood by speakers of German transcended language and cultural shifts over a very long period of time, from 962 CE through 1945 CE.



              You can therefore think of "Reich" as similar to the English "realm" but different. The "Reich" is what German speakers view to be the empire of the German state, with authority derived from a unified "German people" within the empire instead of from a religious deity or a monarchy. As such, a Reich is distinctly German. I assume that since the 1940s every English speaking person on the planet had learned that the word "Reich" essentially means "Realm of Germany", there was never any need to translate it. And translating it would have lost some meaning, since there's no clean way to articulate this concept in English.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Feb 16 at 17:08









              R MacR Mac

              2,336513




              2,336513








              • 2





                This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

                – Oldbag
                Feb 16 at 19:46






              • 14





                @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

                – Anyon
                Feb 16 at 20:01








              • 12





                @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

                – Marcel Krüger
                Feb 16 at 23:39






              • 3





                @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

                – Michael W.
                Feb 18 at 18:32






              • 2





                The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

                – R Mac
                Feb 19 at 0:46














              • 2





                This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

                – Oldbag
                Feb 16 at 19:46






              • 14





                @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

                – Anyon
                Feb 16 at 20:01








              • 12





                @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

                – Marcel Krüger
                Feb 16 at 23:39






              • 3





                @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

                – Michael W.
                Feb 18 at 18:32






              • 2





                The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

                – R Mac
                Feb 19 at 0:46








              2




              2





              This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

              – Oldbag
              Feb 16 at 19:46





              This is fascinating, but now I'm dying to know what "The Second Reich" is. (???)

              – Oldbag
              Feb 16 at 19:46




              14




              14





              @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

              – Anyon
              Feb 16 at 20:01







              @Oldbag The Nazis used the term to mean the 1871-1918 German Empire (Deutsches Reich), from unification until Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated.

              – Anyon
              Feb 16 at 20:01






              12




              12





              @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

              – Marcel Krüger
              Feb 16 at 23:39





              @RMac For german speakers, a "Reich" does not necessarily mean the "Empire of the german state", it is not that nation specific. For example the British Empire is also a "Reich", the "Britische (Welt)Reich".

              – Marcel Krüger
              Feb 16 at 23:39




              3




              3





              @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

              – Michael W.
              Feb 18 at 18:32





              @Anyon To finish the point you started, there was no "second" Reich. The Nazis just liked the number three more than two, so applied to retroactively to a period of time that never used "reich" so that they could be the "third" instead of the "second." They were very superstitious about numbers.

              – Michael W.
              Feb 18 at 18:32




              2




              2





              The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

              – R Mac
              Feb 19 at 0:46





              The empire of Kaiser Wilhelm's was certainly called a "Reich" of its time, though not actually the "Second Reich". The "Third Reich" took its title from Hitler's ambitions to conquer all of Europe, drawing on conquests of the path to succinctly explain the intent of Germany's WW2 efforts. So the "First Reich" of course wasn't actually called that in its day, either. Also, fun fact, "Reich" does have a Middle English cognate in "riche" or "ryche", meaning kingdom or empire.

              – R Mac
              Feb 19 at 0:46











              12














              The use of the German word "Reich" clearly conveys that one is referring to Germany (or at least to a German-speaking country). If one were to replace "Reich" by "Empire" (or a similar English-language alternative), one would have to refer to "The Third German Empire" (or similar), whereas using the German word "Reich" automatically conveys that it is Germany (or another German-speaking country) that is being referred to, thus removing the need for the extra word.



              In other words, The Third Reich is more compact than The Third German Empire", while automatically conveying that it is Germany that is being referred to.






              share|improve this answer


























              • I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

                – choster
                Feb 20 at 17:48


















              12














              The use of the German word "Reich" clearly conveys that one is referring to Germany (or at least to a German-speaking country). If one were to replace "Reich" by "Empire" (or a similar English-language alternative), one would have to refer to "The Third German Empire" (or similar), whereas using the German word "Reich" automatically conveys that it is Germany (or another German-speaking country) that is being referred to, thus removing the need for the extra word.



              In other words, The Third Reich is more compact than The Third German Empire", while automatically conveying that it is Germany that is being referred to.






              share|improve this answer


























              • I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

                – choster
                Feb 20 at 17:48
















              12












              12








              12







              The use of the German word "Reich" clearly conveys that one is referring to Germany (or at least to a German-speaking country). If one were to replace "Reich" by "Empire" (or a similar English-language alternative), one would have to refer to "The Third German Empire" (or similar), whereas using the German word "Reich" automatically conveys that it is Germany (or another German-speaking country) that is being referred to, thus removing the need for the extra word.



              In other words, The Third Reich is more compact than The Third German Empire", while automatically conveying that it is Germany that is being referred to.






              share|improve this answer















              The use of the German word "Reich" clearly conveys that one is referring to Germany (or at least to a German-speaking country). If one were to replace "Reich" by "Empire" (or a similar English-language alternative), one would have to refer to "The Third German Empire" (or similar), whereas using the German word "Reich" automatically conveys that it is Germany (or another German-speaking country) that is being referred to, thus removing the need for the extra word.



              In other words, The Third Reich is more compact than The Third German Empire", while automatically conveying that it is Germany that is being referred to.







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Feb 19 at 23:30

























              answered Feb 19 at 19:12









              TrevorDTrevorD

              10.6k22257




              10.6k22257













              • I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

                – choster
                Feb 20 at 17:48





















              • I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

                – choster
                Feb 20 at 17:48



















              I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

              – choster
              Feb 20 at 17:48







              I would say this is the best answer, in that Reich could be translated into other terms, but this term is distinctively German and has become traditional usage, much as we refer to the chancellor and not the prime minister, even though chancellor is itself a translation and refers to very different posts in English-speaking countries. This is also why we speak of the Japanese Diet — itself a weird borrowing from First Reich terminology — and not its Parliament (or Kokkai), and of Egyptian governorates and Chinese prefectures instead of provinces.

              – choster
              Feb 20 at 17:48













              7














              I think as to why "Reich" was retained is because of a simple matter of productivity and suitability of the word "Reich;" i.e., the economy of the German word itself warrants retention.



              "Third Reich" has contexts:



              a) It is related to Germany - because of "Reich"



              b) It is related to XX century history - because of "Third"



              c) It just sounds "cool"



              It's just an economy of words: with "Third Reich" we have a lot of contextual information condensed into just two words.



              Comparison with another languages



              Russian:
              As a native Russian speaker, I can inform you that the same is in Russian language: "Das Dritte Reich" is translated as "Третий Рейх"( "Рейх" is transliteration of "Reich")



              I don't know how native English speakers can understand "The Third Realm," but for Russian speaking, "Третий Мир," can be easily confused with concept of Third Rome.



              Again, it's merely a question of economy.



              Two words clearly defined in their historical and geographical context (and "Reich" sounds cool in Russian - and English - too).



              Japanese(and Chinese?): Although if we look further on East we can find that in China and Japan translation 第三帝国 is used (but kanji themselves are embodiment of economy, so my "theory of economy of words" still works)



              Swedish: Tredje_riket - looks like translation.



              Edit: Clarification from @prof-falken:




              Swedish is (and was so even more before and during WWII) so culturally close to Germany, and linguistically is still, that "rike" and "reich" are not only cognates, but dare I say understood in the same way between the languages.




              Slovak: Tretia ríša Aha! And in Slovak we have an ambiguity! (Altghough I suppose that for most Slovaks it's not a problem to mix German words with ease).



              (Please do not take too seriously my hypothesis. I would be glad to entertain contention if I seem to be incorrect).






              share|improve this answer





















              • 1





                On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

                – TimLymington
                Feb 17 at 21:31






              • 2





                I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

                – Emil Jeřábek
                Feb 18 at 9:45






              • 1





                @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

                – trolley813
                Feb 18 at 10:32






              • 3





                As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

                – Kapten-N
                Feb 18 at 12:25






              • 1





                OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

                – Vladimir F
                Feb 19 at 20:07
















              7














              I think as to why "Reich" was retained is because of a simple matter of productivity and suitability of the word "Reich;" i.e., the economy of the German word itself warrants retention.



              "Third Reich" has contexts:



              a) It is related to Germany - because of "Reich"



              b) It is related to XX century history - because of "Third"



              c) It just sounds "cool"



              It's just an economy of words: with "Third Reich" we have a lot of contextual information condensed into just two words.



              Comparison with another languages



              Russian:
              As a native Russian speaker, I can inform you that the same is in Russian language: "Das Dritte Reich" is translated as "Третий Рейх"( "Рейх" is transliteration of "Reich")



              I don't know how native English speakers can understand "The Third Realm," but for Russian speaking, "Третий Мир," can be easily confused with concept of Third Rome.



              Again, it's merely a question of economy.



              Two words clearly defined in their historical and geographical context (and "Reich" sounds cool in Russian - and English - too).



              Japanese(and Chinese?): Although if we look further on East we can find that in China and Japan translation 第三帝国 is used (but kanji themselves are embodiment of economy, so my "theory of economy of words" still works)



              Swedish: Tredje_riket - looks like translation.



              Edit: Clarification from @prof-falken:




              Swedish is (and was so even more before and during WWII) so culturally close to Germany, and linguistically is still, that "rike" and "reich" are not only cognates, but dare I say understood in the same way between the languages.




              Slovak: Tretia ríša Aha! And in Slovak we have an ambiguity! (Altghough I suppose that for most Slovaks it's not a problem to mix German words with ease).



              (Please do not take too seriously my hypothesis. I would be glad to entertain contention if I seem to be incorrect).






              share|improve this answer





















              • 1





                On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

                – TimLymington
                Feb 17 at 21:31






              • 2





                I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

                – Emil Jeřábek
                Feb 18 at 9:45






              • 1





                @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

                – trolley813
                Feb 18 at 10:32






              • 3





                As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

                – Kapten-N
                Feb 18 at 12:25






              • 1





                OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

                – Vladimir F
                Feb 19 at 20:07














              7












              7








              7







              I think as to why "Reich" was retained is because of a simple matter of productivity and suitability of the word "Reich;" i.e., the economy of the German word itself warrants retention.



              "Third Reich" has contexts:



              a) It is related to Germany - because of "Reich"



              b) It is related to XX century history - because of "Third"



              c) It just sounds "cool"



              It's just an economy of words: with "Third Reich" we have a lot of contextual information condensed into just two words.



              Comparison with another languages



              Russian:
              As a native Russian speaker, I can inform you that the same is in Russian language: "Das Dritte Reich" is translated as "Третий Рейх"( "Рейх" is transliteration of "Reich")



              I don't know how native English speakers can understand "The Third Realm," but for Russian speaking, "Третий Мир," can be easily confused with concept of Third Rome.



              Again, it's merely a question of economy.



              Two words clearly defined in their historical and geographical context (and "Reich" sounds cool in Russian - and English - too).



              Japanese(and Chinese?): Although if we look further on East we can find that in China and Japan translation 第三帝国 is used (but kanji themselves are embodiment of economy, so my "theory of economy of words" still works)



              Swedish: Tredje_riket - looks like translation.



              Edit: Clarification from @prof-falken:




              Swedish is (and was so even more before and during WWII) so culturally close to Germany, and linguistically is still, that "rike" and "reich" are not only cognates, but dare I say understood in the same way between the languages.




              Slovak: Tretia ríša Aha! And in Slovak we have an ambiguity! (Altghough I suppose that for most Slovaks it's not a problem to mix German words with ease).



              (Please do not take too seriously my hypothesis. I would be glad to entertain contention if I seem to be incorrect).






              share|improve this answer















              I think as to why "Reich" was retained is because of a simple matter of productivity and suitability of the word "Reich;" i.e., the economy of the German word itself warrants retention.



              "Third Reich" has contexts:



              a) It is related to Germany - because of "Reich"



              b) It is related to XX century history - because of "Third"



              c) It just sounds "cool"



              It's just an economy of words: with "Third Reich" we have a lot of contextual information condensed into just two words.



              Comparison with another languages



              Russian:
              As a native Russian speaker, I can inform you that the same is in Russian language: "Das Dritte Reich" is translated as "Третий Рейх"( "Рейх" is transliteration of "Reich")



              I don't know how native English speakers can understand "The Third Realm," but for Russian speaking, "Третий Мир," can be easily confused with concept of Third Rome.



              Again, it's merely a question of economy.



              Two words clearly defined in their historical and geographical context (and "Reich" sounds cool in Russian - and English - too).



              Japanese(and Chinese?): Although if we look further on East we can find that in China and Japan translation 第三帝国 is used (but kanji themselves are embodiment of economy, so my "theory of economy of words" still works)



              Swedish: Tredje_riket - looks like translation.



              Edit: Clarification from @prof-falken:




              Swedish is (and was so even more before and during WWII) so culturally close to Germany, and linguistically is still, that "rike" and "reich" are not only cognates, but dare I say understood in the same way between the languages.




              Slovak: Tretia ríša Aha! And in Slovak we have an ambiguity! (Altghough I suppose that for most Slovaks it's not a problem to mix German words with ease).



              (Please do not take too seriously my hypothesis. I would be glad to entertain contention if I seem to be incorrect).







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited 2 days ago

























              answered Feb 17 at 18:55









              Alex YuAlex Yu

              1746




              1746








              • 1





                On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

                – TimLymington
                Feb 17 at 21:31






              • 2





                I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

                – Emil Jeřábek
                Feb 18 at 9:45






              • 1





                @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

                – trolley813
                Feb 18 at 10:32






              • 3





                As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

                – Kapten-N
                Feb 18 at 12:25






              • 1





                OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

                – Vladimir F
                Feb 19 at 20:07














              • 1





                On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

                – TimLymington
                Feb 17 at 21:31






              • 2





                I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

                – Emil Jeřábek
                Feb 18 at 9:45






              • 1





                @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

                – trolley813
                Feb 18 at 10:32






              • 3





                As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

                – Kapten-N
                Feb 18 at 12:25






              • 1





                OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

                – Vladimir F
                Feb 19 at 20:07








              1




              1





              On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

              – TimLymington
              Feb 17 at 21:31





              On the same level of seriousness; wouldn't "Третий Мир" translate as "Third World"?

              – TimLymington
              Feb 17 at 21:31




              2




              2





              I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

              – Emil Jeřábek
              Feb 18 at 9:45





              I have frankly no idea what you are trying to say with the “Czech” example, which is really Slovak. There is nothing ambiguous about it. For the record, Slovak “ríša” and Czech “říše” are perfectly common native words. (I suppose they originated as Germanic loanwords, but that would have happened centuries ago, nothing to do with the Nazis.) It is used in historic names such as the Roman Empire or the Great Moravian Empire, but also in diverse contexts such as biological kingdom, or phrases such as “in the realm of fantasy”.

              – Emil Jeřábek
              Feb 18 at 9:45




              1




              1





              @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

              – trolley813
              Feb 18 at 10:32





              @AlexYu But Third Rome is usually literally translated as "Третий Рим" (I'm also a Russian native speaker). And the connection between the "Third" and 20th century is also quite doubtful, especially for non-historians (since one has to know about the existence of 1st and 2nd Reichs, to understand the expression for 3rd)

              – trolley813
              Feb 18 at 10:32




              3




              3





              As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

              – Kapten-N
              Feb 18 at 12:25





              As a Swede I can confirm that "rike" is the same word as "Reich". However, with no qualifier (like "third") it's usually used about Sweden and not Germany. I believe that this relates to the monarchy as the Swedish word for "kingdom" is "kungarike".

              – Kapten-N
              Feb 18 at 12:25




              1




              1





              OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

              – Vladimir F
              Feb 19 at 20:07





              OK, but the other ones are really obscure. Frege's third realm and something chiliastic that I can't even find anywhere. Normally there is only one widely used meaning.

              – Vladimir F
              Feb 19 at 20:07











              4














              Could not some of the usage be based on the Shirer bestseller “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” ?



              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.





















              • No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

                – Brock Adams
                2 days ago


















              4














              Could not some of the usage be based on the Shirer bestseller “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” ?



              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.





















              • No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

                – Brock Adams
                2 days ago
















              4












              4








              4







              Could not some of the usage be based on the Shirer bestseller “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” ?



              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.










              Could not some of the usage be based on the Shirer bestseller “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” ?



              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich







              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer






              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              answered Feb 19 at 20:45









              Richard J McCutcheon IIRichard J McCutcheon II

              411




              411




              New contributor




              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.





              New contributor





              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






              Richard J McCutcheon II is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.













              • No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

                – Brock Adams
                2 days ago





















              • No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

                – Brock Adams
                2 days ago



















              No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

              – Brock Adams
              2 days ago







              No. The term was massively used before the book was published (1960) and unchanged by the book's (re)releases. See this chart.

              – Brock Adams
              2 days ago













              1














              Not a direct answer, but I'm surprised none of the other comments or answers mentioned that English indeed does have a direct cognate to the German "Reich," as can be seen in the word "Bishopric":



              https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bishopric



              This word is still in use in place of "diocese" by various protestant denominations rejecting the latin-derived word in favor of a Germanic one.



              So lack of suitable cognates alone can't be the answer. Although it would have been interesting if we had half-translated with the other remaining halves, leaving us with the "dritte ric," rather than "third Reich."






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.

























                1














                Not a direct answer, but I'm surprised none of the other comments or answers mentioned that English indeed does have a direct cognate to the German "Reich," as can be seen in the word "Bishopric":



                https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bishopric



                This word is still in use in place of "diocese" by various protestant denominations rejecting the latin-derived word in favor of a Germanic one.



                So lack of suitable cognates alone can't be the answer. Although it would have been interesting if we had half-translated with the other remaining halves, leaving us with the "dritte ric," rather than "third Reich."






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  Not a direct answer, but I'm surprised none of the other comments or answers mentioned that English indeed does have a direct cognate to the German "Reich," as can be seen in the word "Bishopric":



                  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bishopric



                  This word is still in use in place of "diocese" by various protestant denominations rejecting the latin-derived word in favor of a Germanic one.



                  So lack of suitable cognates alone can't be the answer. Although it would have been interesting if we had half-translated with the other remaining halves, leaving us with the "dritte ric," rather than "third Reich."






                  share|improve this answer








                  New contributor




                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.










                  Not a direct answer, but I'm surprised none of the other comments or answers mentioned that English indeed does have a direct cognate to the German "Reich," as can be seen in the word "Bishopric":



                  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bishopric



                  This word is still in use in place of "diocese" by various protestant denominations rejecting the latin-derived word in favor of a Germanic one.



                  So lack of suitable cognates alone can't be the answer. Although it would have been interesting if we had half-translated with the other remaining halves, leaving us with the "dritte ric," rather than "third Reich."







                  share|improve this answer








                  New contributor




                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer






                  New contributor




                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  answered Feb 20 at 21:08









                  MittenchopsMittenchops

                  1112




                  1112




                  New contributor




                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





                  New contributor





                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  Mittenchops is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.























                      -3














                      I am going to suggest a rather simplistic reason for this that has little to do with language : space.



                      In journalism space is money. You (and your editor) will always try and cram as much as possible into the smallest space they can, generally because more free space means more advertising revenue (a little simplistic, but space=money is they idea here). A single letter can push a line of text onto a new printed line, eating into column inches available elsewhere.



                      An editor faced with "Dritten Reich" will happily accept "Third" as being shorter than Dritten, not to mention that Dritten conveys no information to the English speaking reader. Reich, on the other hand, has no simple translation (and it's clear from the more informed answers here that even agreeing one would be difficult). So those five letters can stay as they are (from the editor's point of view). Not only does "reich" convey the German connection clearly, but the combination (as noted by @Alex-Yu) does sound "cool".



                      So it may simply boil down to the constant desire to save space in printed news of the day and the soundbite being a good result.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                      • This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 19 at 18:32






                      • 1





                        I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                        – StephenG
                        Feb 20 at 0:03











                      • perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 20 at 20:45
















                      -3














                      I am going to suggest a rather simplistic reason for this that has little to do with language : space.



                      In journalism space is money. You (and your editor) will always try and cram as much as possible into the smallest space they can, generally because more free space means more advertising revenue (a little simplistic, but space=money is they idea here). A single letter can push a line of text onto a new printed line, eating into column inches available elsewhere.



                      An editor faced with "Dritten Reich" will happily accept "Third" as being shorter than Dritten, not to mention that Dritten conveys no information to the English speaking reader. Reich, on the other hand, has no simple translation (and it's clear from the more informed answers here that even agreeing one would be difficult). So those five letters can stay as they are (from the editor's point of view). Not only does "reich" convey the German connection clearly, but the combination (as noted by @Alex-Yu) does sound "cool".



                      So it may simply boil down to the constant desire to save space in printed news of the day and the soundbite being a good result.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                      • This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 19 at 18:32






                      • 1





                        I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                        – StephenG
                        Feb 20 at 0:03











                      • perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 20 at 20:45














                      -3












                      -3








                      -3







                      I am going to suggest a rather simplistic reason for this that has little to do with language : space.



                      In journalism space is money. You (and your editor) will always try and cram as much as possible into the smallest space they can, generally because more free space means more advertising revenue (a little simplistic, but space=money is they idea here). A single letter can push a line of text onto a new printed line, eating into column inches available elsewhere.



                      An editor faced with "Dritten Reich" will happily accept "Third" as being shorter than Dritten, not to mention that Dritten conveys no information to the English speaking reader. Reich, on the other hand, has no simple translation (and it's clear from the more informed answers here that even agreeing one would be difficult). So those five letters can stay as they are (from the editor's point of view). Not only does "reich" convey the German connection clearly, but the combination (as noted by @Alex-Yu) does sound "cool".



                      So it may simply boil down to the constant desire to save space in printed news of the day and the soundbite being a good result.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.










                      I am going to suggest a rather simplistic reason for this that has little to do with language : space.



                      In journalism space is money. You (and your editor) will always try and cram as much as possible into the smallest space they can, generally because more free space means more advertising revenue (a little simplistic, but space=money is they idea here). A single letter can push a line of text onto a new printed line, eating into column inches available elsewhere.



                      An editor faced with "Dritten Reich" will happily accept "Third" as being shorter than Dritten, not to mention that Dritten conveys no information to the English speaking reader. Reich, on the other hand, has no simple translation (and it's clear from the more informed answers here that even agreeing one would be difficult). So those five letters can stay as they are (from the editor's point of view). Not only does "reich" convey the German connection clearly, but the combination (as noted by @Alex-Yu) does sound "cool".



                      So it may simply boil down to the constant desire to save space in printed news of the day and the soundbite being a good result.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered Feb 18 at 14:22









                      StephenGStephenG

                      1111




                      1111




                      New contributor




                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      StephenG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.













                      • This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 19 at 18:32






                      • 1





                        I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                        – StephenG
                        Feb 20 at 0:03











                      • perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 20 at 20:45



















                      • This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 19 at 18:32






                      • 1





                        I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                        – StephenG
                        Feb 20 at 0:03











                      • perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                        – Chris W.
                        Feb 20 at 20:45

















                      This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                      – Chris W.
                      Feb 19 at 18:32





                      This would be an interesting explanation (after all, news headlines take greater leaps to sound controversial and pithy), but curiously, Third Reich didn't appear in newspapers until after it had ceased to exist. Before that, a few American newspapers used "Reich" from the late 30's onward. Until then, editors used "Germany" or "Nazi Germany", which is about as controversial and pithy as "Third Reich".

                      – Chris W.
                      Feb 19 at 18:32




                      1




                      1





                      I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                      – StephenG
                      Feb 20 at 0:03





                      I'm dubious of your claim that it didn't appear in print until after 1945. It was in current use during the war and was referenced in movies during the war. For example, during Casablanca (1942) the main characters have a brief exchange using the term.

                      – StephenG
                      Feb 20 at 0:03













                      perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                      – Chris W.
                      Feb 20 at 20:45





                      perhaps I was a bit quick in saying "after the Third Reich ended", but the example in Casablanca (which I mentioned in my original answer as well) is a relatively rare instance where, evidently, the authors had learned about the "Third Reich" demagogy in Germany. Unfortunately, I have not actually been able to find any mention of the term in The Times or The NY Times, which I sifted through from 1932 till 1945. I had spotted one mention of Reich in 1939 of NYT, but other than that, the country was virtually only referred to as "Germany".

                      – Chris W.
                      Feb 20 at 20:45











                      -3















                      And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?




                      That's why.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                        – Cascabel
                        Feb 20 at 23:18
















                      -3















                      And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?




                      That's why.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                        – Cascabel
                        Feb 20 at 23:18














                      -3












                      -3








                      -3








                      And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?




                      That's why.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.











                      And what is the English synonym of reich? Realm?




                      That's why.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered Feb 20 at 17:06









                      Greg SchmitGreg Schmit

                      952




                      952




                      New contributor




                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      Greg Schmit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.








                      • 2





                        This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                        – Cascabel
                        Feb 20 at 23:18














                      • 2





                        This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                        – Cascabel
                        Feb 20 at 23:18








                      2




                      2





                      This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                      – Cascabel
                      Feb 20 at 23:18





                      This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review

                      – Cascabel
                      Feb 20 at 23:18











                      -4














                      IMHO is is wrong to call Nazi controlled Germany the Third Reich because the Nazis liked to call it the Third Reich, hoping to gain some of the glory associated with that phrase in Germany according to Chris W.'s answer. Of course they never officially changed the name to Third Reich, so Third Reich is also inappropriate because of not being official.



                      So I think instead that it should be called Germany when describing it as a country and a nation, and Nazi Germany, Nazi controlled Germany, Nazi infested Germany, Nazi contaminated Germany, etc., etc. when describing the Nazi rule of Germany.



                      Similarly the previous regime should not be called the Weimar Republic or Weimar Germany, because that was a Nazi habit.



                      The official name of the German state was Deutsches Reich (German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1871 to 1943, and Grossdeutsches Reich (Greater German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1943 to 1945. The republic in 1919 took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous German Empire of 1871-1918, and the Nazis in turn took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous republic in 1933.



                      There was direct continuity from 1871-1945. So another and third reason not to call Nazi ruled Germany the Third Reich is because Nazi run Germany was actually still the Second Reich. And I am not certain whether, or for how long, or to what degree, the present Federal Republic of Germany was or is considered to be a continuation of the Second Reich. And if the Federal Republic of Germany is not a continuation of the Second Reich that would make it the true Third Reich, and thus calling Nazi Germany the Third Reich would be legitimizing their stealing the term.



                      In any case the Nazis were jumping the gun by calling their rule the Third Reich.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 19 at 17:57


















                      -4














                      IMHO is is wrong to call Nazi controlled Germany the Third Reich because the Nazis liked to call it the Third Reich, hoping to gain some of the glory associated with that phrase in Germany according to Chris W.'s answer. Of course they never officially changed the name to Third Reich, so Third Reich is also inappropriate because of not being official.



                      So I think instead that it should be called Germany when describing it as a country and a nation, and Nazi Germany, Nazi controlled Germany, Nazi infested Germany, Nazi contaminated Germany, etc., etc. when describing the Nazi rule of Germany.



                      Similarly the previous regime should not be called the Weimar Republic or Weimar Germany, because that was a Nazi habit.



                      The official name of the German state was Deutsches Reich (German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1871 to 1943, and Grossdeutsches Reich (Greater German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1943 to 1945. The republic in 1919 took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous German Empire of 1871-1918, and the Nazis in turn took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous republic in 1933.



                      There was direct continuity from 1871-1945. So another and third reason not to call Nazi ruled Germany the Third Reich is because Nazi run Germany was actually still the Second Reich. And I am not certain whether, or for how long, or to what degree, the present Federal Republic of Germany was or is considered to be a continuation of the Second Reich. And if the Federal Republic of Germany is not a continuation of the Second Reich that would make it the true Third Reich, and thus calling Nazi Germany the Third Reich would be legitimizing their stealing the term.



                      In any case the Nazis were jumping the gun by calling their rule the Third Reich.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 19 at 17:57
















                      -4












                      -4








                      -4







                      IMHO is is wrong to call Nazi controlled Germany the Third Reich because the Nazis liked to call it the Third Reich, hoping to gain some of the glory associated with that phrase in Germany according to Chris W.'s answer. Of course they never officially changed the name to Third Reich, so Third Reich is also inappropriate because of not being official.



                      So I think instead that it should be called Germany when describing it as a country and a nation, and Nazi Germany, Nazi controlled Germany, Nazi infested Germany, Nazi contaminated Germany, etc., etc. when describing the Nazi rule of Germany.



                      Similarly the previous regime should not be called the Weimar Republic or Weimar Germany, because that was a Nazi habit.



                      The official name of the German state was Deutsches Reich (German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1871 to 1943, and Grossdeutsches Reich (Greater German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1943 to 1945. The republic in 1919 took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous German Empire of 1871-1918, and the Nazis in turn took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous republic in 1933.



                      There was direct continuity from 1871-1945. So another and third reason not to call Nazi ruled Germany the Third Reich is because Nazi run Germany was actually still the Second Reich. And I am not certain whether, or for how long, or to what degree, the present Federal Republic of Germany was or is considered to be a continuation of the Second Reich. And if the Federal Republic of Germany is not a continuation of the Second Reich that would make it the true Third Reich, and thus calling Nazi Germany the Third Reich would be legitimizing their stealing the term.



                      In any case the Nazis were jumping the gun by calling their rule the Third Reich.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.










                      IMHO is is wrong to call Nazi controlled Germany the Third Reich because the Nazis liked to call it the Third Reich, hoping to gain some of the glory associated with that phrase in Germany according to Chris W.'s answer. Of course they never officially changed the name to Third Reich, so Third Reich is also inappropriate because of not being official.



                      So I think instead that it should be called Germany when describing it as a country and a nation, and Nazi Germany, Nazi controlled Germany, Nazi infested Germany, Nazi contaminated Germany, etc., etc. when describing the Nazi rule of Germany.



                      Similarly the previous regime should not be called the Weimar Republic or Weimar Germany, because that was a Nazi habit.



                      The official name of the German state was Deutsches Reich (German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1871 to 1943, and Grossdeutsches Reich (Greater German Realm/Empire/State/Polity/Country, etc.) from 1943 to 1945. The republic in 1919 took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous German Empire of 1871-1918, and the Nazis in turn took over the bureaucracy and institutions of the previous republic in 1933.



                      There was direct continuity from 1871-1945. So another and third reason not to call Nazi ruled Germany the Third Reich is because Nazi run Germany was actually still the Second Reich. And I am not certain whether, or for how long, or to what degree, the present Federal Republic of Germany was or is considered to be a continuation of the Second Reich. And if the Federal Republic of Germany is not a continuation of the Second Reich that would make it the true Third Reich, and thus calling Nazi Germany the Third Reich would be legitimizing their stealing the term.



                      In any case the Nazis were jumping the gun by calling their rule the Third Reich.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered Feb 19 at 17:40









                      M.A. GoldingM.A. Golding

                      3




                      3




                      New contributor




                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      M.A. Golding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.








                      • 2





                        The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 19 at 17:57
















                      • 2





                        The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 19 at 17:57










                      2




                      2





                      The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 19 at 17:57







                      The Federal Republic of Germany is officially a Bundesrepublik, not a Reich. I suspect (and hope) that Germany will never again officially call itself a Reich. And I am sure that most Germans today would not appreciate you using that name.

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 19 at 17:57













                      -5














                      From my point of view, "the third Reich" is a lame or poor translation of "das dritte Reich". It is an half done work and an half badly done one.



                      A translation with a correct rendering of the pathos of the expression "das dritte Reich" would be "the third German Empire" with the explicit upper case to "German" and "Empire" when it isn't mendatory in English.



                      The expression "the third Reich" only survived out of lazyness from fast english speaking journalists.






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 3





                        The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 17 at 22:59











                      • @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                        – Till
                        Feb 18 at 11:23











                      • @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                        – EmLi
                        Feb 18 at 12:05






                      • 1





                        The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 18 at 13:35








                      • 4





                        Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                        – mama
                        Feb 18 at 14:43
















                      -5














                      From my point of view, "the third Reich" is a lame or poor translation of "das dritte Reich". It is an half done work and an half badly done one.



                      A translation with a correct rendering of the pathos of the expression "das dritte Reich" would be "the third German Empire" with the explicit upper case to "German" and "Empire" when it isn't mendatory in English.



                      The expression "the third Reich" only survived out of lazyness from fast english speaking journalists.






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 3





                        The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 17 at 22:59











                      • @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                        – Till
                        Feb 18 at 11:23











                      • @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                        – EmLi
                        Feb 18 at 12:05






                      • 1





                        The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 18 at 13:35








                      • 4





                        Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                        – mama
                        Feb 18 at 14:43














                      -5












                      -5








                      -5







                      From my point of view, "the third Reich" is a lame or poor translation of "das dritte Reich". It is an half done work and an half badly done one.



                      A translation with a correct rendering of the pathos of the expression "das dritte Reich" would be "the third German Empire" with the explicit upper case to "German" and "Empire" when it isn't mendatory in English.



                      The expression "the third Reich" only survived out of lazyness from fast english speaking journalists.






                      share|improve this answer













                      From my point of view, "the third Reich" is a lame or poor translation of "das dritte Reich". It is an half done work and an half badly done one.



                      A translation with a correct rendering of the pathos of the expression "das dritte Reich" would be "the third German Empire" with the explicit upper case to "German" and "Empire" when it isn't mendatory in English.



                      The expression "the third Reich" only survived out of lazyness from fast english speaking journalists.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Feb 17 at 11:03









                      daniel Azuelosdaniel Azuelos

                      36418




                      36418








                      • 3





                        The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 17 at 22:59











                      • @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                        – Till
                        Feb 18 at 11:23











                      • @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                        – EmLi
                        Feb 18 at 12:05






                      • 1





                        The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 18 at 13:35








                      • 4





                        Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                        – mama
                        Feb 18 at 14:43














                      • 3





                        The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 17 at 22:59











                      • @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                        – Till
                        Feb 18 at 11:23











                      • @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                        – EmLi
                        Feb 18 at 12:05






                      • 1





                        The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                        – Peter Shor
                        Feb 18 at 13:35








                      • 4





                        Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                        – mama
                        Feb 18 at 14:43








                      3




                      3





                      The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 17 at 22:59





                      The response of most English speakers to "The third German Empire" would be "What were the first two?"

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 17 at 22:59













                      @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                      – Till
                      Feb 18 at 11:23





                      @PeterShor If I remember correctly, that would be the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations. It's not like the number just came out of nowhere.

                      – Till
                      Feb 18 at 11:23













                      @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                      – EmLi
                      Feb 18 at 12:05





                      @PeterShor HRR and Germany between the Franco-Preussian war and the end of WW1.

                      – EmLi
                      Feb 18 at 12:05




                      1




                      1





                      The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 18 at 13:35







                      The second one was the Deutsches Kaiserreich, generally known in English as "Germany", which lasted from 1871 to 1918. See Wikipedia. Since it wasn't usually called an "empire" in English, "Third German Empire" would have been a very confusing name.

                      – Peter Shor
                      Feb 18 at 13:35






                      4




                      4





                      Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                      – mama
                      Feb 18 at 14:43





                      Language is for communication, for which economy is a value, not a blemish. The fact that the term stayed is proof of its success for communicating an idea. Fortunately English is not ruled by an Academy of Language, like Spanish is. So, there is no organization trying to dictate whether any of its natural developments is right or wrong. The only credible judge of a translation is usage.

                      – mama
                      Feb 18 at 14:43





                      protected by Robusto Feb 20 at 21:10



                      Thank you for your interest in this question.
                      Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



                      Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

                      ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

                      Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?