"Power" in Language
Language can confuse us but it can also give us important insights, if we know how to ask. We should not treat language as merely labels that people put on things in order to be able to talk about the world. Language hides our assumptions, values, and beliefs. Words and phrases emerge because people name what they want to talk about and in a way that they want to talk about it. That’s why many words cannot be easily translated from one language to another. You need to know the context, and nuances of meanings. The more complex things we want to talk about are, the more difficult it is to find a translation that effectively conveys our ideas from one language to another.
For example, when I was translating into English one of the poems that I wrote many years ago in Russian, I was confronted by the challenge of choosing an adjective that would convey the meaning of the Russian word “зыбкий” (pronounced “zybkiy,” with the stress on the underlined letter). Depending on the context, it can be translated into English as “fragile”, “shaky,” “unsteady,” “unstable,” “loose,” and “wobbly.” And if you look at examples of translation involving this word, you will see that it can be also rendered as “delicate,” “faint,” “elusive,” “ambiguous,” and “untrusty.” Clearly, there is no one word in English that conveys all the meanings of “зыбкий.” We might not be able to tell precisely why a word containing all these meanings was coined in Russian. But the existence of this word – and of words with similar meanings in English – suggests that people want to talk about fragility, ambiguity, and untrustworthiness. It is very likely that words that convey these meanings can be found in many other languages, because people need to be able to discuss what and who they can trust, be sure of, or rely on. However, this understanding does not make the task of translating “зыбкий” into English any easier.
This does not mean that all words in a given language are as difficult to translate. Some words describe things that are more specific, something that can be observed in many different cultures—for example, “dog” or “table.” These words are usually easily translated in a specific context, for example, “I walk my dog every morning.” (This is not to say that these words don’t have subordinate meanings that differ between cultures. For example, in some cultures “dog” can be used to refer to an unpleasant, worthless person.)
For example, when I was translating into English one of the poems that I wrote many years ago in Russian, I was confronted by the challenge of choosing an adjective that would convey the meaning of the Russian word “зыбкий” (pronounced “zybkiy,” with the stress on the underlined letter). Depending on the context, it can be translated into English as “fragile”, “shaky,” “unsteady,” “unstable,” “loose,” and “wobbly.” And if you look at examples of translation involving this word, you will see that it can be also rendered as “delicate,” “faint,” “elusive,” “ambiguous,” and “untrusty.” Clearly, there is no one word in English that conveys all the meanings of “зыбкий.” We might not be able to tell precisely why a word containing all these meanings was coined in Russian. But the existence of this word – and of words with similar meanings in English – suggests that people want to talk about fragility, ambiguity, and untrustworthiness. It is very likely that words that convey these meanings can be found in many other languages, because people need to be able to discuss what and who they can trust, be sure of, or rely on. However, this understanding does not make the task of translating “зыбкий” into English any easier.
This does not mean that all words in a given language are as difficult to translate. Some words describe things that are more specific, something that can be observed in many different cultures—for example, “dog” or “table.” These words are usually easily translated in a specific context, for example, “I walk my dog every morning.” (This is not to say that these words don’t have subordinate meanings that differ between cultures. For example, in some cultures “dog” can be used to refer to an unpleasant, worthless person.)
Image credit: James Barker
It appears that words can tell us something about meaning shared by people in different cultures and communities. There is a basic literal meaning of “dog” shared in different cultures because dogs are domesticated animals that can be found around the world; they have played an important role in human civilizations since the time when these animals were domesticated thousands of years ago (precise time is a matter of debate among scholars).
If a word for describing a certain phenomenon exists in many different cultures, we could sometimes even argue that this is something important for people as a species. Which does not mean that this something is understood exactly the same human beings everywhere. Take, for example, such word as “love.” It has many meaning and nuances (e.g., some languages have move words for “love” than others); yet, it is present in many cultures around the word, and there are intersections between meanings that have existed across time and space. Hence, we can conclude that love—in its many shapes and forms—is essential in the lives of human beings.
The topic of this book is power. So, I wondered: How do people talk about power in different languages? What can similarities in ways human beings talk about power across cultures tell us about phenomena hiding behind this word? Here, I am going to offer some thoughts. However, this is in no way an exhaustive linguistic exploration of the word “power” and its meaning across languages. Moreover, considering how tricky people's relationship with language is (see Language has power over us), I do not expect to discover some ultimate truth about power by exploring what words people use to talk about it. Rather, I hope to find some themes and threads that will give me ideas on how to to explore the complex phenomena that we describe using the word "power."
Linguists divide languages into “families.” Languages that belong to the same family share a common ancestor, which is called “proto-language” of that particular family. A family of languages can belong to another family. For example, Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese (and a few other languages) belong to a language family known as “Romance languages.” But this family itself is part of the larger Indo-European family of languages, which includes many other languages native to Europe and South Asia.
If a word for describing a certain phenomenon exists in many different cultures, we could sometimes even argue that this is something important for people as a species. Which does not mean that this something is understood exactly the same human beings everywhere. Take, for example, such word as “love.” It has many meaning and nuances (e.g., some languages have move words for “love” than others); yet, it is present in many cultures around the word, and there are intersections between meanings that have existed across time and space. Hence, we can conclude that love—in its many shapes and forms—is essential in the lives of human beings.
The topic of this book is power. So, I wondered: How do people talk about power in different languages? What can similarities in ways human beings talk about power across cultures tell us about phenomena hiding behind this word? Here, I am going to offer some thoughts. However, this is in no way an exhaustive linguistic exploration of the word “power” and its meaning across languages. Moreover, considering how tricky people's relationship with language is (see Language has power over us), I do not expect to discover some ultimate truth about power by exploring what words people use to talk about it. Rather, I hope to find some themes and threads that will give me ideas on how to to explore the complex phenomena that we describe using the word "power."
Linguists divide languages into “families.” Languages that belong to the same family share a common ancestor, which is called “proto-language” of that particular family. A family of languages can belong to another family. For example, Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese (and a few other languages) belong to a language family known as “Romance languages.” But this family itself is part of the larger Indo-European family of languages, which includes many other languages native to Europe and South Asia.
Image credit: Amador Loureiro
The Indo-European family includes such diverse languages as English, Spanish, Russian, and Hindustani. This does not mean that the modern forms of these languages are similar, but some precious remnants of their commonality can be occasionally discovered in our everyday language. For example, I was surprised when I realized one day, many years ago, that the Russian word “будить” (“budit”), which means “to wake up,” is related to “Buddha,” which can be translated from Sanskrit as “awakened,” in the sense of “enlightened.” In this case, we can see how modern Russian is related to an ancient Ind0-Aryan language that emerged in South Asia a few thousands of years ago!
Dividing languages into families is a tricky business. Modern languages contain similar words because they have borrowed them from each other; this is not the same as having the same language ancestor. Some scholars say that there are close to 150 language families, others count several hundreds. This is not a linguistic book, and I am not a linguist. So, I won’t be able to dive into all the language families (and definitely not into all the living human languages, of which there are thousands) to explore “power” in all of them.
I have a much more modest goal. I will take a look at “power” in English, Russian, Spanish, German, and French—which are the languages that I can read and speak, to a certain extent. Of these languages, Spanish and French belong to Romance family, German and English belong to Germanic family, and Russian belongs to the Balto-Slavic family. However, all these three families are different branches of the Indo-European mega-family that I already mentioned, and they can be traced back to the common language ancestor known as Proto-Indo-European.
Clearly, based on just these few languages, I cannot make conclusions about meaning of power in languages of all cultures. However, it is important to keep in mind that the Indo-European family of languages includes a great many very diverse languages. And a lot of crucial conversations about power in the modern world are happening in these languages. People having these conversations have a lot of… for the lack of better word, power (or at least, some form of power, which I discuss elsewhere). For instance, many scholarly conversations about power take place in English.
So, let’s start with English, since this book is written in it. I will then discuss how the English word “power” translates into Russian, Spanish, French, and German.
Here are some of the meanings of “power” in English that we learn when we open Merriam-Webster. I will go ahead and bold some key words that appear in these definitions and, I believe, can help us better understand the meaning of “power” in English.
So, “power” in English can be understood as “ability to act or produce an effect,” “legal or official authority, capacity, or right,” “possession of control, authority, or influence over others” (also “one having such power—specifically: a sovereign state”), “a controlling group,” “a force of armed men” (archaic), “physical might,” “mental or moral efficacy,” “political control or influence.”
These are all meanings related to people and their relationships—what I will call in this book “social power.” However, there are also meanings not related to social power, and they are also worth mentioning. These meanings include “an order of angels” (in Christianity), “the number of times as indicated by an exponent that a number occurs as a factor” and “the product itself,” “cardinal number” (in one of its meanings), “a source or means of supplying energy” (especially “electricity”), “motive power” (which applies to motion in machinery), “the time rate at which work is done or energy emitted or transferred,” “magnification” (in one of its meanings), “scope” (in some of its meanings), and “the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis in a statistical test when a particular alternative hypothesis happens to be true.”
Dividing languages into families is a tricky business. Modern languages contain similar words because they have borrowed them from each other; this is not the same as having the same language ancestor. Some scholars say that there are close to 150 language families, others count several hundreds. This is not a linguistic book, and I am not a linguist. So, I won’t be able to dive into all the language families (and definitely not into all the living human languages, of which there are thousands) to explore “power” in all of them.
I have a much more modest goal. I will take a look at “power” in English, Russian, Spanish, German, and French—which are the languages that I can read and speak, to a certain extent. Of these languages, Spanish and French belong to Romance family, German and English belong to Germanic family, and Russian belongs to the Balto-Slavic family. However, all these three families are different branches of the Indo-European mega-family that I already mentioned, and they can be traced back to the common language ancestor known as Proto-Indo-European.
Clearly, based on just these few languages, I cannot make conclusions about meaning of power in languages of all cultures. However, it is important to keep in mind that the Indo-European family of languages includes a great many very diverse languages. And a lot of crucial conversations about power in the modern world are happening in these languages. People having these conversations have a lot of… for the lack of better word, power (or at least, some form of power, which I discuss elsewhere). For instance, many scholarly conversations about power take place in English.
So, let’s start with English, since this book is written in it. I will then discuss how the English word “power” translates into Russian, Spanish, French, and German.
Here are some of the meanings of “power” in English that we learn when we open Merriam-Webster. I will go ahead and bold some key words that appear in these definitions and, I believe, can help us better understand the meaning of “power” in English.
So, “power” in English can be understood as “ability to act or produce an effect,” “legal or official authority, capacity, or right,” “possession of control, authority, or influence over others” (also “one having such power—specifically: a sovereign state”), “a controlling group,” “a force of armed men” (archaic), “physical might,” “mental or moral efficacy,” “political control or influence.”
These are all meanings related to people and their relationships—what I will call in this book “social power.” However, there are also meanings not related to social power, and they are also worth mentioning. These meanings include “an order of angels” (in Christianity), “the number of times as indicated by an exponent that a number occurs as a factor” and “the product itself,” “cardinal number” (in one of its meanings), “a source or means of supplying energy” (especially “electricity”), “motive power” (which applies to motion in machinery), “the time rate at which work is done or energy emitted or transferred,” “magnification” (in one of its meanings), “scope” (in some of its meanings), and “the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis in a statistical test when a particular alternative hypothesis happens to be true.”
Image credit: Karsten Würth
“Power” can also be a verb and an adjective. As a verb, it can mean “to supply with power and especially motive power,” “to give impetus to,” “to move about by means of motive power,” and “to move with great speed or force.” As an adjective, it can mean “operated mechanically or electrically rather than manually,” “of, relating to, or utilizing strength,” and “having prestige, or influence.”
Here are the words that I bolded: ability, effect, authority, capacity, right, control, influence, force, might, energy, impetus, strength, prestige. All these words can describe people, what they do, or relationships between them.
First of all, what this list suggests (in my opinion) is that “power” describes something that permeates people’s lives. If it wasn’t pervasive, it’s definition would be short a specific. Another thing that I notice just by looking at this list is that power is not something explicitly good or bad, but it can be interpreted as good or bad based on circumstances. For example, being in control can be perceived as something positive: “She is in control of her life”—or as something negative: “Stop trying to control me!” You probably heard conversations about people "in power" who do bad things to other people. On the other hand, we are all familiar with the word "empowerment," which is seen as something clearly positive.
Let’s now move to the next language on my list: Russian (which happens to be my mother tongue). Notably, the English word “power” does not have a direct equivalent in Russian. What I mean is that in Russian, there is no one word that would have the same meanings as the word “power” in English. Instead, there are a number of words whose definitions intersect with definitions of “power” in English (which is similar to the situation with the word "zibkiy," mentioned earlier). In the list that follows, each word in Russian is a translation of the English “power.” What follows each word in Russian is its meanings translated back to English. I have bolded words in English that can help us broaden the definition of social power. They were not present in the Merriam-Webster list, but they are semantically related to the words on that list.
To reiterate, all these words can be used in Russian to talk about what in English people call “power.” I believe that it is especially important that almost each of the words has several translations besides “power”; when we look at these other translations, we see clear intersections with the meanings of “power” in English as listed in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
To remind you, the list of words I extracted from Merriam-Webster definitions were these: ability, effect, authority, capacity, right, control, influence, force, might, energy,
impetus, strength, prestige. Now, after exploring meanings of power in Russian, we can add the following to our list: rule, grip, dominion, vigor, vitality, faculty, aptitude, impact, sway, action, proxy, competency, productivity.
At this point, there are two big themes that I see emerging in the way we talk about power: the first there has something to do with ability (the focus is on what a person can do) and the second one has something to do with influence (the focus is on how one can impact others).
Ability: ability, capacity, energy, impetus, strength, force, vigor, vitality, faculty, aptitude, competency, productivity
Influence: effect, authority, right, control, force, influence, might, rule, dominion, grip, sway, proxy, prestige, impact, action
[I intentionally put "force" in two different categories.]
“Power” can also be a verb and an adjective. As a verb, it can mean “to supply with power and especially motive power,” “to give impetus to,” “to move about by means of motive power,” and “to move with great speed or force.” As an adjective, it can mean “operated mechanically or electrically rather than manually,” “of, relating to, or utilizing strength,” and “having prestige, or influence.”
Here are the words that I bolded: ability, effect, authority, capacity, right, control, influence, force, might, energy, impetus, strength, prestige. All these words can describe people, what they do, or relationships between them.
First of all, what this list suggests (in my opinion) is that “power” describes something that permeates people’s lives. If it wasn’t pervasive, it’s definition would be short a specific. Another thing that I notice just by looking at this list is that power is not something explicitly good or bad, but it can be interpreted as good or bad based on circumstances. For example, being in control can be perceived as something positive: “She is in control of her life”—or as something negative: “Stop trying to control me!” You probably heard conversations about people "in power" who do bad things to other people. On the other hand, we are all familiar with the word "empowerment," which is seen as something clearly positive.
Let’s now move to the next language on my list: Russian (which happens to be my mother tongue). Notably, the English word “power” does not have a direct equivalent in Russian. What I mean is that in Russian, there is no one word that would have the same meanings as the word “power” in English. Instead, there are a number of words whose definitions intersect with definitions of “power” in English (which is similar to the situation with the word "zibkiy," mentioned earlier). In the list that follows, each word in Russian is a translation of the English “power.” What follows each word in Russian is its meanings translated back to English. I have bolded words in English that can help us broaden the definition of social power. They were not present in the Merriam-Webster list, but they are semantically related to the words on that list.
- власть: power, authority, rule, control, grip, dominion
- мощность: power, capacity, output, energy, duty, width
- сила: force, power, strength, intensity, might, energy
- мощь: power, might, capacity, vis
- энергия: energy, power, vigor, vitality, intensity, might
- способность: ability, capacity, power, capability, faculty, aptitude
- держава: power, orb, globe, mound
- степень: power, degree, extent, rate, stage, grade
- могущество: power, might, potency, puissance, potence
- влияние: influence, impact, effect, power, sway, action
- возможность: opportunity, possibility, potential, capacity, ability, power
- полномочие: authority, power, proxy, commission, competency, procuration
- производительность: performance, productivity, capacity, output, efficiency, power
- государственная власть: power
- сила увеличения: power
- бог, божество: deity, divinity, god, almighty, [higher] power
- сверхъестественные силы: [supernatural] power
- множество: multiplicity, plurality, variety, multitude, plenty, power
- силовой: power (adj.)
- моторный: motor, of engine, power (adj.)
- машинный: machine, mechanical, power, mechanic
- снабжать силовым двигателем: power (verb)
- много: many, much, more, a lot of, power
To reiterate, all these words can be used in Russian to talk about what in English people call “power.” I believe that it is especially important that almost each of the words has several translations besides “power”; when we look at these other translations, we see clear intersections with the meanings of “power” in English as listed in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
To remind you, the list of words I extracted from Merriam-Webster definitions were these: ability, effect, authority, capacity, right, control, influence, force, might, energy,
impetus, strength, prestige. Now, after exploring meanings of power in Russian, we can add the following to our list: rule, grip, dominion, vigor, vitality, faculty, aptitude, impact, sway, action, proxy, competency, productivity.
At this point, there are two big themes that I see emerging in the way we talk about power: the first there has something to do with ability (the focus is on what a person can do) and the second one has something to do with influence (the focus is on how one can impact others).
Ability: ability, capacity, energy, impetus, strength, force, vigor, vitality, faculty, aptitude, competency, productivity
Influence: effect, authority, right, control, force, influence, might, rule, dominion, grip, sway, proxy, prestige, impact, action
[I intentionally put "force" in two different categories.]
Image credit: Leon Ardho
Turning to Spanish, we get a very similar list of meanings. Some additional definitions related to social power that we find here include “power of attorney” (one of the meanings of “el poder”), “drive” (for “la energía”), “pressure” (for “la fuerza”), and “clout, hold” (for “la influencia”). In Spanish we also find one especially important detail: the main translation of power is “poder”; it is a noun, but also verb that can be translated into English as “can.”
If we go back to English and Russian, we will see that the connection between “power” and the modal verb “can” is present in these languages as well. For example, in English, “can” means “to be able to,” which brings us to ability. In Russian, “can” is translated with the verb “мочь” (e.g., “I can” is “я могу”), which shares the root with the noun “мощь” (which I previously listed as one of the translations of “power” to Russian, with meanings “power, might, capacity, vis”). Notably, “мощь” goes back to the Proto-Indo-European root with the meaning "being able".
We find a similar situation in French, where the noun “pouvoir”—the main translation of “power” to French—is also the verb meaning “can.” This parallelism with Spanish is not surprising, since these two languages are closely related through their common ancestor, Latin (more recent than the Proto-Indo-European one).
We do not see the same parallelism of power/can in German, but we do see similar translations of power—including those with meanings of “force,” “might,” “strength,” “sway,” “output,” “vigor,” “energy,” “potency,” “capacity,” etc. Other additional meanings associated with social power that we get by translating “power” into German are “push” (for “die Energie“); „violence“ (for ”die Gewalt“); „warrant“ (for „die Befugnis“); „dominance“ (for „die Herrschaft“); and „propel, urge, move“ (for „antreiben”)—all of them appear to fall into the category of influence. At the same time, notably, one of the main translations of “power” in German is “die Macht,” which means “power, force, might, strength, potency, sway” but comes from the same Proto-Indo-European root with the meaning “being able” - the same root that the Russian words “мочь” and “мощь” come from.
So, based on my admittedly superficial analysis, it appears that when speakers of at least a few Indo-European languages talk about things related to social power, what they are discussing is people’s abilities and influences. The difference between these two aspects of power is subtle but it is important to note. Ability is something that a person can be described as having or not having. Influence, on the other hand, is about interactions between people. Based on the variety of words that exist to help us discuss our abilities and influences, we can conclude that these aspects of social existence are considered important. That's why people created a lot of words to talk about abilities and influences, with their many nuances.
Indeed, people are constantly preoccupied with abilities and capacities, to the point that they apply the modal verb “can” to speak about each other, but also about numerous aspects of the world—both animate and inanimate, abstract and concrete. (Consider also the variety of words with suffixes "-able" and "-ible".) In fact, the English word “power” comes from Latin “posse,” which meant “be able.” People are obviously also preoccupied with influences and effects. And not without a good reason, since many if not most conflicts between human beings are about who impacts whom, who decides how things should be, and whose interpretations of reality should be accepted by others.
A few more words need to be said about the modal verb “can.” In English, it is related to German “können” and comes from Old English “cunnan,” which meant “to know”—and could mean “know how to.” Notably, in modern Spanish and French, the verb that means “to know” is used in some contexts to express “to be able to” (as in "No se cantar" = "I can't sing"). In Russian, the synonym of “мочь” (mention earlier) is “уметь,” which has the root “ум” (“mind”)—thus, the reference to knowledge as a prerequisite to being able to do something is present there as well.
Notably, in Old English, different words were used for “be able to,” and “know how to”; yet another word was used to express “may.” Nowadays they are all translated to the modern English as “can” (see Megan Perry’s article Alfraed Grammaticus, in press). Indeed, you might notice that “can” is sometimes used to discuss abilities (“I can sing opera,” meaning I have this skill), and sometimes it is used to discuss what we are allowed to do (“I can sing in this room,” meaning I am allowed to sing in this space; I have a right to do that; I won't be punished if I do that).
“Being allowed to” can be described as lying somewhere on the intersection of ability and influence. As an ability, it is something that “belongs” to me, my characteristic; but it reflects influence of other people on me, and mine on others, since being allowed or not allowed to do something is all about my relationship with others.
Now, I would like to take a look into yet one more language: Sanskrit. The reason for this choice lies in the importance of the Indian thought and philosophy in my personal life and scholarship (which I discuss in more detail elsewhere [link to be added]).
Sanskrit is the sacred language of Hinduism; it is the language of classical Hindu philosophy, and of historical texts of Buddhism. Sanskrit belongs to the same Indo-European family as Russian, English, German, Spanish, and French; but it has much deeper connections with its Proto-Indo-European ancestor than modern languages.
Two main translations of “power” to Sanskrit are “utsāha” and “shakti.” “Utsāha” can be translated back into English as “enthusiasm,” “zeal,” “energy,” “strength,” “power,” “fortitude,” “strength of will,” “resolution,” “firmness,” “effort,” “endurance,” “perseverance,” “cheerfulness,” “joy,” “happiness,” “initiative,” and “drive.”
These meanings have some intersections with the meanings of power in English, Russian, German, Spanish, and French. In these five languages, we already saw “strength,” “drive,” “energy,” and a few related words. But Sanskrit’s “utsāha” also offers some important additions that give us more food for thought. For example, we can think of power as something associated with effort, something that requires endurance. Indeed, this meaning is also present in the English phrasal verb “power through,” which stands for “to continue in a determined and strong manner until the end of something, even when it’s difficult.” We can also think of the link of power and joy. The five languages we looked into earlier similarly suggest that the word “power” and its meanings are not seen as something plainly negative or positive. For example, language signals that power is related to domination and violence, but also to energy and empowerment.
Finally, let’s turn to the Sanskrit word “shakti.” Literally, this word can be translated as “energy, ability, strength, effort, power, might, capability” (see Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary)—which are all important themes present in the five modern languages that I have briefly analyzed. But, interestingly, Shakti is much more that just a word to describe people’s abilities and influences. In Hinduism, Shakti is a goddess, or even the Universal Power that sustains all existence. It is the primordial cosmic energy that flows through the universe.
If we go back to English and Russian, we will see that the connection between “power” and the modal verb “can” is present in these languages as well. For example, in English, “can” means “to be able to,” which brings us to ability. In Russian, “can” is translated with the verb “мочь” (e.g., “I can” is “я могу”), which shares the root with the noun “мощь” (which I previously listed as one of the translations of “power” to Russian, with meanings “power, might, capacity, vis”). Notably, “мощь” goes back to the Proto-Indo-European root with the meaning "being able".
We find a similar situation in French, where the noun “pouvoir”—the main translation of “power” to French—is also the verb meaning “can.” This parallelism with Spanish is not surprising, since these two languages are closely related through their common ancestor, Latin (more recent than the Proto-Indo-European one).
We do not see the same parallelism of power/can in German, but we do see similar translations of power—including those with meanings of “force,” “might,” “strength,” “sway,” “output,” “vigor,” “energy,” “potency,” “capacity,” etc. Other additional meanings associated with social power that we get by translating “power” into German are “push” (for “die Energie“); „violence“ (for ”die Gewalt“); „warrant“ (for „die Befugnis“); „dominance“ (for „die Herrschaft“); and „propel, urge, move“ (for „antreiben”)—all of them appear to fall into the category of influence. At the same time, notably, one of the main translations of “power” in German is “die Macht,” which means “power, force, might, strength, potency, sway” but comes from the same Proto-Indo-European root with the meaning “being able” - the same root that the Russian words “мочь” and “мощь” come from.
So, based on my admittedly superficial analysis, it appears that when speakers of at least a few Indo-European languages talk about things related to social power, what they are discussing is people’s abilities and influences. The difference between these two aspects of power is subtle but it is important to note. Ability is something that a person can be described as having or not having. Influence, on the other hand, is about interactions between people. Based on the variety of words that exist to help us discuss our abilities and influences, we can conclude that these aspects of social existence are considered important. That's why people created a lot of words to talk about abilities and influences, with their many nuances.
Indeed, people are constantly preoccupied with abilities and capacities, to the point that they apply the modal verb “can” to speak about each other, but also about numerous aspects of the world—both animate and inanimate, abstract and concrete. (Consider also the variety of words with suffixes "-able" and "-ible".) In fact, the English word “power” comes from Latin “posse,” which meant “be able.” People are obviously also preoccupied with influences and effects. And not without a good reason, since many if not most conflicts between human beings are about who impacts whom, who decides how things should be, and whose interpretations of reality should be accepted by others.
A few more words need to be said about the modal verb “can.” In English, it is related to German “können” and comes from Old English “cunnan,” which meant “to know”—and could mean “know how to.” Notably, in modern Spanish and French, the verb that means “to know” is used in some contexts to express “to be able to” (as in "No se cantar" = "I can't sing"). In Russian, the synonym of “мочь” (mention earlier) is “уметь,” which has the root “ум” (“mind”)—thus, the reference to knowledge as a prerequisite to being able to do something is present there as well.
Notably, in Old English, different words were used for “be able to,” and “know how to”; yet another word was used to express “may.” Nowadays they are all translated to the modern English as “can” (see Megan Perry’s article Alfraed Grammaticus, in press). Indeed, you might notice that “can” is sometimes used to discuss abilities (“I can sing opera,” meaning I have this skill), and sometimes it is used to discuss what we are allowed to do (“I can sing in this room,” meaning I am allowed to sing in this space; I have a right to do that; I won't be punished if I do that).
“Being allowed to” can be described as lying somewhere on the intersection of ability and influence. As an ability, it is something that “belongs” to me, my characteristic; but it reflects influence of other people on me, and mine on others, since being allowed or not allowed to do something is all about my relationship with others.
Now, I would like to take a look into yet one more language: Sanskrit. The reason for this choice lies in the importance of the Indian thought and philosophy in my personal life and scholarship (which I discuss in more detail elsewhere [link to be added]).
Sanskrit is the sacred language of Hinduism; it is the language of classical Hindu philosophy, and of historical texts of Buddhism. Sanskrit belongs to the same Indo-European family as Russian, English, German, Spanish, and French; but it has much deeper connections with its Proto-Indo-European ancestor than modern languages.
Two main translations of “power” to Sanskrit are “utsāha” and “shakti.” “Utsāha” can be translated back into English as “enthusiasm,” “zeal,” “energy,” “strength,” “power,” “fortitude,” “strength of will,” “resolution,” “firmness,” “effort,” “endurance,” “perseverance,” “cheerfulness,” “joy,” “happiness,” “initiative,” and “drive.”
These meanings have some intersections with the meanings of power in English, Russian, German, Spanish, and French. In these five languages, we already saw “strength,” “drive,” “energy,” and a few related words. But Sanskrit’s “utsāha” also offers some important additions that give us more food for thought. For example, we can think of power as something associated with effort, something that requires endurance. Indeed, this meaning is also present in the English phrasal verb “power through,” which stands for “to continue in a determined and strong manner until the end of something, even when it’s difficult.” We can also think of the link of power and joy. The five languages we looked into earlier similarly suggest that the word “power” and its meanings are not seen as something plainly negative or positive. For example, language signals that power is related to domination and violence, but also to energy and empowerment.
Finally, let’s turn to the Sanskrit word “shakti.” Literally, this word can be translated as “energy, ability, strength, effort, power, might, capability” (see Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary)—which are all important themes present in the five modern languages that I have briefly analyzed. But, interestingly, Shakti is much more that just a word to describe people’s abilities and influences. In Hinduism, Shakti is a goddess, or even the Universal Power that sustains all existence. It is the primordial cosmic energy that flows through the universe.
Image credit: Alex Green
This is how Shakti is described on the website of yoga center Kripalu:
“Shakti means power, energy, or force. Mythologically, Shakti is always described as feminine, often personified as the goddess, Devi, the divine feminine consort of the divine masculine god Shiva. But at the deepest level, Shakti transcends gender.
Metaphysically, in Indian tradition—as well as in Taoism (where they refer to Shakti as 'chi' or 'qi'), Shakti is the name given to the fundamental creative dynamism that gives rise to universes. She is considered the source of both matter and physical energy, as well as of just about everything else. Her dance is the dance of the cosmos.
It makes sense then, that there are different forms, levels, and expressions of Shakti in the universe. If you sit next to the Columbia River in Oregon, outside Portland Oregon, you’ll get a visceral sense of power flowing as the current. Following the river downstream, you’ll discover an enormous hydroelectric plant, converting the waterpower into electricity. That same electricity flows through the wiring in the local restaurant, runs the refrigerator, keeps the lights on, and lets you connect wirelessly to the Internet. These energies seem different and serve different purposes, but they are all forces, powers. They are all forms of Shakti. And, beyond the observable physical power is something much subtler and more multileveled: Shakti is the innate creativity at the heart of all living things. She’s the life force energy that makes the river flow just as she powers your breath, makes your heart beat, and fires your muscles and neurons. She is often equated with prana (the force within the breath), but she is also the subtle energy that gives rise to prana.”
This vision of power appears to be quite different from everything we have seen before! It goes beyond dividing power into “social” and “not social,” that I suggested earlier. This is power that exists everywhere, in all humans and beyond them. What might this mean, and is it even relevant for our conversation? I will be returning to these questions elsewhere [add link].
In the meantime, taking the hint from language, I conclude that there are several things that we should consider as we are exploring power. First, there are at least three distinct aspects or forms of power worth looking into: (1) power as ability; (2) power as influence; (3) and what I call “may” power (referring to what one is allowed or disallowed to do). Next, it is important to discuss the duality of power: its negative aspects, revealed in such words as “violence” and “domination,” “control,” and “force”; and its positive aspects that can be found in such words as “energy,” “productivity,” “drive,” and “empowerment.” And it might be worth paying special attention to the idea of power as energy, in ways more specific and more philosophical (e.g., following insights from Sanskrit).
This is how Shakti is described on the website of yoga center Kripalu:
“Shakti means power, energy, or force. Mythologically, Shakti is always described as feminine, often personified as the goddess, Devi, the divine feminine consort of the divine masculine god Shiva. But at the deepest level, Shakti transcends gender.
Metaphysically, in Indian tradition—as well as in Taoism (where they refer to Shakti as 'chi' or 'qi'), Shakti is the name given to the fundamental creative dynamism that gives rise to universes. She is considered the source of both matter and physical energy, as well as of just about everything else. Her dance is the dance of the cosmos.
It makes sense then, that there are different forms, levels, and expressions of Shakti in the universe. If you sit next to the Columbia River in Oregon, outside Portland Oregon, you’ll get a visceral sense of power flowing as the current. Following the river downstream, you’ll discover an enormous hydroelectric plant, converting the waterpower into electricity. That same electricity flows through the wiring in the local restaurant, runs the refrigerator, keeps the lights on, and lets you connect wirelessly to the Internet. These energies seem different and serve different purposes, but they are all forces, powers. They are all forms of Shakti. And, beyond the observable physical power is something much subtler and more multileveled: Shakti is the innate creativity at the heart of all living things. She’s the life force energy that makes the river flow just as she powers your breath, makes your heart beat, and fires your muscles and neurons. She is often equated with prana (the force within the breath), but she is also the subtle energy that gives rise to prana.”
This vision of power appears to be quite different from everything we have seen before! It goes beyond dividing power into “social” and “not social,” that I suggested earlier. This is power that exists everywhere, in all humans and beyond them. What might this mean, and is it even relevant for our conversation? I will be returning to these questions elsewhere [add link].
In the meantime, taking the hint from language, I conclude that there are several things that we should consider as we are exploring power. First, there are at least three distinct aspects or forms of power worth looking into: (1) power as ability; (2) power as influence; (3) and what I call “may” power (referring to what one is allowed or disallowed to do). Next, it is important to discuss the duality of power: its negative aspects, revealed in such words as “violence” and “domination,” “control,” and “force”; and its positive aspects that can be found in such words as “energy,” “productivity,” “drive,” and “empowerment.” And it might be worth paying special attention to the idea of power as energy, in ways more specific and more philosophical (e.g., following insights from Sanskrit).