affront vs insult vs offend

Peaksid ju teadma, et inglise keeles on tohutult, tohutult palju väljendeid ja sõnu. Kõik tähendavad täpselt sama, kuid ma arvan, et siiski kasutatakse neid erinevates olukordades.

Affront: Avalikult solvama

Insult: Solvama

Offend: Haavama, karistama, riivama (oleneb kontekstist)

Mis mõttes “avalikult”? Nagu näiteks kirjutaks Õhtulehes halvustava artikli või, see oleks “avalik”.

Avalikult solvamine vastavalt viisakuse piiridesse jääva keelekasutusega, ma usun. Koht võib olla mis iganes – televisioon, ajaleht, kõne avalikul üritusel.

Offend on solvama, ründama.

Hello,

• offend
• insult
• affront
• outrage

These things mean pretty much the same thing at root, which is that somebody was hurt.

Native English speakers will know the difference unconsciously, so it’s quite difficult to explain. But I will try.

Usually I will be ‘offended’ if someone has wounded me unintentionally. English people usually respond to being offended by being dismissive, haughty and activating other ego-defense mechansims. The person who made the (unintentional) offense will soon pick up some ‘weirdness’ from the other person (the vibe of the conversation will shift), and will usually come to the conclusion that they ’did someting wrong’ – aborting the conversation as-is to enquire about the matter. This is of course the aim of the offended person. Depending on the depth of the percieved offence, the offended person may either explain how they feel or respond with “everything’s _fine_ thanks” (meaning that things are definitely not fine and they want to send a strong signal that they are not, but that they don’t want to talk about it right now). These things can drag on for quite some time but usually offence is not enough to cause a serious problem for a long long time.

If I’m insulted, then someone has said something directed at me personally or at a group that they know I am a member of. The person who said it may or may not consider it offensive (it might just be an observation that they believe to be true that I disagree strongly with), so this again could be unintentional. But it can definitely be intentional too. When intentional the insults are rather blatant and childlike – the aim is to win points.

If I’m affronted then I’m feeling that someone is intentionally stepping into a full-blown confrontation with me. A challenge has been laid down which must be responded to (although no response is an option). The affronter is usually looking to dominate the affrontee. It’s a difficult position to be in, especially if there are onlookers. There are a variety of response choices here, and none of them are easy. Popular options are accepting the challenge and getting warlike (you think you can win), trying to defuse the situation (mature solution) or refusing to participate (whether or not you are right you think you will lose in some sense).

If I’m outraged then I will very likely take some action in response. It’s unlikely that I can be outraged by anything except someone deliberately making statements that they know will cause an extreme reaction, or by something that I feel is morally or ethically disgusting. When people are outraged they feel violated and angry. An outraged person or group will almost certainly go on the offensive against the person or group that perpetrated the outrage.

These might not be an exact fit with these words’ dictionary definitions, but they are reasonable approximations of how they’re unconsciously used and understood by English speakers in the UK.

English people will often use the stronger words in jest, e.g. ‘I’m outraged by that!!!’ (said with mock indignation and a smile) when someone says something very mildly controversial.

I hope that helps.

Yes, that’s a good understanding.

What can you tell me about Estonian equivalents?