Page 1 of 1

The phrase "turn into a werewolf"

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 9:15 pm
by Jamie
I've often heard (or read) the phrase "turn into a werewolf" used in reference to a werewolf's transformation from human form to beast form, and it drives me crazy. The person is, by definition, already a werewolf. So whatever they are doing, they're NOT turning into a werewolf. Depending on what the alternate form looks like, you might be able to call it "turning into a wolf man" but, in my opinion, it should never be "turning into a werewolf."

The common usage of this incorrect term also makes it harder to discuss the process by which a person becomes a werewolf (the initial conversion of an ordinary human to a werewolf, which, by definition, must occur before the first shapeshift) because this, too, often gets called "turning into a werewolf" when, in fact, it should be called "getting converted into a werewolf" or some such thing.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 9:19 pm
by Anubis
too me i don't realy care, even like you said it is inaccurate.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:34 pm
by Apokryltaros
I think they mean "turn into {wolf-form}"
I mean, it may not be obvious that the turn into-ee in question is a werewolf.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:02 pm
by vrikasatma
It's just another misnomer/inaccuracy. The English language is loaded with them.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:35 pm
by Vuldari
I've noticed that before, and it irks my a little knowing that is causes some confusion and misconceptions, but overall, usually the context in which the phrase is used makes it perfectly clear what it is supposed to mean in that instance. (Whether the author means "Transforming into Wolf/Gestalt form", or "Is completely converted into a werewolf for the first time...following the bite, etc.")


It's slightly annoying...but it's not worth making a fuss about, or scolding someone for using the phrase inappropriately in a statement or story.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:35 pm
by Renorei
I didn't vote, because there's really no option to express how I feel on the situation. It doesn't bother me at all when someone says that a person with lycanthropy 'turns into a werewolf', because it's not actually inaccurate. It's just a different way of looking at things. However, I am bothered by incorrect usages of the word werewolf, such as when therians call themselves that.

The way I see it, one could use the phrase 'turn into a werewolf' to refer to shifting to gestalt form and not be inaccurate. After all, they could be using the word to refer to the actual state the body is in. After all:

wolf form = wolf

human = were (which means man, in another language)

gestalt = were+wolf, werewolf (manwolf), since the body that they are in actually looks like a man + wolf

So, if a person with lycanthropy is about to shift to gestalt form, and says "I am now going to turn into a werewolf", I don't consider that inaccurate. They're referring to the state their physical body will be in, not their overall condition.

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:12 am
by Vilkacis
This goes back to the thread about what people consider a 'werewolf.'

In my opinion, the most important part of a werewolf is the form rather than the transformation. To say that one 'turns into a werewolf' seems perfectly natural to me, as they gain the form that most people (in my experience) directly associate with a werewolf.

In a forum like this, I could see being a tad bit more rigorous with definitions, as you would be any time you take a specialized view on a subject; however, I don't see it as a big deal if the context is clear. After all, language is about expressing ideas. I only see a problem if the meaning becomes unclear.

I didn't vote either because there's not enough middle ground. I'm not too picky about the phrase, but it doesn't bother me at all. I don't necessarily like the phrase to be used in every way, but I don't view it as technically inaccurate, either. As Renorei said, it's just one of a few distinct ways of looking at things.

-- Vilkacis

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:27 am
by Scott Gardener
I'm used to being obsessive-compulsive, so I'm only bothered by that phrase as much as I am other things, like calling Boris Karloff's monster role "Frankenstein," when Frankenstein is actually the doctor who made the creature.

Still, it makes me feel good to know that I'm not the only one who notices the strangeness of that phrase. You turn into a werewolf once, when you're bitten. After that, your status is irrevocable.

Likewise, you don't really "turn human" when the fur recedes.

Is a "werewolf form" some kind of Kalindo martial arts move? Or, maybe it's an application for a natural weapons hunting license?

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:11 am
by Lupin
When it's applied to the process of shapshifting between forms, yeah, it's technically inaccurate, but it does describe the process farily well. One starts out with something that looks like a human, and ends up looking like something that most people would call a werewolf. I'm not really bothered by it since there is usually enough context to figure out which action is going on.

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 1:09 pm
by Apokryltaros
My only gripe with the term is when they use it too much, as though changing into a werewolf required an on/off switch.

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:04 pm
by Terastas
It doesn't bother me. We use "turn into a-" to describe countless other transformations. The only real problem I could see is that you seldom hear the term "turned into a human." You usually hear that described as "turned back to normal."