At the risk of being overly pedantic, topologists would typically classify this as venom.

Venom is inert if digested; it's only a problem if it gets in your blood stream. So arrows that were laced with venom and thereby contaminated meat were actually perfectly safe to eat.

Poison is different. If ingested, inhaled, or absorbed it will kill you.

▲ skrebbel a day ago | parent | next [-]

We Dutch solve this problem by having a single word for "poison", "venom and "toxin"¹. Everybody still knows what you mean and nobody gets to be pedantic.

¹ and "badly compressed looping animation"

▲ pjmlp 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Same in Portuguese, veneno.

Although there are plenty of other opportunities for pedantry, especially when we take regionalisms, and other Portuguese speaking countries into account.

▲ OptionOfT a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Vergif.

I don't know how you get from 'ver' to badly compressed.

(And I'm a native Flemish speaker, but living in the USA for 8+ years, so I barely, if ever speak it).

▲ tharkun__ a day ago | parent | next [-]

Remove Ver, add t and you got German: Gift

Vergiftet would be past tense.

Funny that in English gift is a word but entirely different meaning.

Languages are fun, especially in Europe where they're all different but all so related but everyone does not want to admit it.

▲ animal531 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's probably the same, for example in Afrikaans its just gif. Vergif is the verb action of doing it, and vergiftig the same past tense of it having happened previously.

▲ thaumasiotes 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Funny that in English gift is a word but entirely different meaning.

In English it maintains its original Germanic meaning derived from the verb give.

The sense of "poison" in German comes from a euphemistic use of "gift". (Literally 'something given' but actually used to calque Greek "dosis", which also literally meant 'something given', but was used to mean 'dose [of medicine]'.)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Gift#Etymology

Summing up, the reason gift is a word in English with an entirely different meaning from what it has in German is that everyone in Germany forgot what gift meant.

(The reason it's gift and not something more like yift is the Danelaw.)

	▲	tharkun__ 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is one of the reasons I like HN: Random knowledge transfer like this. Appreciated! Also: in German Dosis is the word for dose. `Die Dosis macht das Gift` (the dose makes the poison)

▲ stevekemp 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> all so related but everyone does not want to admit it.

I'm laughing in Finnish..

▲

tharkun__ 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Hehe, you found the exception that proves the rule :P

▲

SllX 11 hours ago | parent [-]

And Basque, Maltese, Turkish and Georgian.

Magyar (Hungarian) and Finnish are both Uralic languages along with Estonian and the Sámi languages, but none of these are related to the Indo-European languages common in the other parts of Europe.

And while most of Europe’s extant languages are in the Indo-European language family, there’s still a fair number of differences between Albanian, Germanic, Hellenic, Celtic, Romantic and Slavic languages.

	▲	tharkun__ 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh for sure there are many differences, that comes with them being different languages, countries, ethnicity. You can do this on many levels. The point was essentially what you're showing here: People focusing on all the differences instead of shared history, languages influencing each other and how we're all not that different in the end. If you want to, even within what are nowadays countries and what outsiders would say is "one language" and "one ethnicity", you can start focusing on differences and make people dislike each other.

▲ birdsongs 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In Norwegian, "gift" is poison. It's also the word for married (de er gift).

	▲	pantalaimon 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In German "Mitgift" is what the bride gets from her family when she enters marriage.

▲ bruce343434 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In NL, just 'gif' is sufficient

▲ XCSme a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is the word "stamppot" ?

▲

usrnm 20 hours ago | parent [-]

Just "food". Any kind of Dutch food fits the description.

	▲	skrebbel 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is true, notably a kroket is both looping and badly compressed.

▲ samlinnfer a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same in Chinese (毒). But it is a better solution just not to give pedants the time of the day.

▲ gambiting a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Same in Polish. You'd just call both of these "trucizna".

▲

mbel a day ago | parent [-]

Not really, we have both „jad” (venom) and „trucizna” (poison).

▲

gtech1 a day ago | parent | next [-]

How does this happen ? The poster above you isn't really Polish ? How can someone that claims to know Polish not know there's two different words ?

▲

gambiting 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Obviously I know "jad" but I don't see any issue with calling venom "trucizna". Natural languages aren't C++ and you don't get compiler errors when you speak - to me, there is no issue calling both venoms and poison trucizna. Polish dictionary doesn't seem to contradict it either:

https://sjp.pwn.pl/slowniki/trucizna.html

The point is, both are correct(afaik) while in English venom and poison are definitely two different things.

▲

mbel 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Nobody would say „trujący wąż” (poisonous snake) or „jadowity grzyb” (venomous mushroom). The distinction is similar to English. There are exceptions and contexts where it can be used interchangeably but arguably the same is true for English.

▲

gambiting 17 hours ago | parent [-]

>>Nobody would say „trujący wąż”

No? That's how I've always said it. "Ta żmija jest trująca" - don't see any issue here. Jadowity grzyb I'll agree.

▲

gtech1 13 hours ago | parent [-]

This is fascinating, assuming you are both natives of Poland. Is there as much language variance in Poland as in, say, Italy ?

	▲	gambiting 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No idea how much variance there is in Italy so not sure how to answer that question.

▲

thaumasiotes 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The point is, both are correct(afaik) while in English venom and poison are definitely two different things.

No, the situation in English matches your description exactly: all of these things are called poison. The word venom is almost never used in natural speech.

Furthermore, if you ask English speakers what the difference between poison and venom is, by far the two most common responses will be "there isn't one" and "I don't know". icyfox is just looking to be annoying.

(Another popular option will probably be "it's called venom when you're talking about snakes", which explains roughly 100% of use of venom in natural speech.)

▲

usrnm 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And in Russian we use "jad" ("яд" in cyrillic) for both. Although there is the word "отрава", which can be used for poisons and "яд" is closer to "venom" the difference is almost non-existant and both are often used interchangeably.

▲ VanshPatel99 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

TIL. I always thought that "If it bite you -> you die = venom" and "If you eat, bite, touch -> you die = poison". But your differentiation makes more sense

▲

zahlman a day ago | parent | next [-]

That explains the words "venomous" and "poisonous" used of creatures.

It's different for the actual substances. Although it relates: a venomous creature that bites you will release its venom into your bloodstream.

▲

anonym29 a day ago | parent [-]

>a venomous creature that bites you will release its venom into your bloodstream

unless it's a bee, wasp, hornet, scorpion, stingray, jellyfish, man-of-war, platypus, lionfish, stonefish, sea urchin, or catfish, which all have venom instead of poison, but the delivery mechanism of said venom isn't biting

	▲	zahlman 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I said "bite" echoing the comment I was replying to. Obviously the same applies, mutatis mutandis, to stinging etc.

▲

hearsathought 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If a venomous snake bites you, you die. If you bite a venomous snake, you live. If a poisonous snake bites you, you will. If you bite a poisonous snake, you die.

Or Hamlet's mother died by drinking poisoned wine. Hamlet died by being stabbed with an envenomed sword.

▲ throwaway5465 20 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not overly pedantic at all as it highlights that by using venom the hunters were able to eat what they shot.

▲ hyrix a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

These chemicals are derived from plants where even pedants would classify them as poisons.

The genus name Boophone is from the Greek bous = ox, and phontes= killer of, a clear warning that eating the plant can be fatal to livestock.

▲

cluckindan 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Huh, so telephone is killer of distance and Persephone is killer of… Persians? Grain? Vegetation?

▲

stared 16 hours ago | parent [-]

You're mixing up phōnē (voice) and phonos (slaughter), but the truth about Persephone is actually more metal.

Her name predates Greek contacts with Persians, so the timeline doesn't fit. Instead, it comes from perthein (to destroy) + phonos, making her the "Bringer of Destruction". With a caveat that the etymology of her name is uncertain: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persephone#Name

I do like "killer of distance" for telephone, though. :)

	▲	thaumasiotes 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Instead, it comes from perthein (to destroy) + phonos, making her the "Bringer of Destruction". With a caveat that the etymology of her name is uncertain: But... of all the theories listed there, perthein isn't among them. And if the roots are "destroy" and "death", what would make her the "bringer" of destruction?

▲

icyfox a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Fair point about the source, but the classification usually follows the mode of delivery, not the organism of origin.

Many plant-derived compounds function as venoms once introduced into the bloodstream (arrow coatings, darts, etc.), even if they’re also toxic when ingested. Curare is one example of a plant-based compound - lethal in blood, but largely harmless if eaten.

So while Boophone is absolutely a poison in the ecological sense, using it on arrows still fits the venom/toxin distinction better than a purely ingested poison. Otherwise why would people hunt with this if they got sick the second they ate the meat?

	▲	a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	jeltz 19 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Is it really? We call it poison darts when hunters use poison from the poison dart frog to hunt.

▲ Retric a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In practice the difference is mostly semantics.

Venom is still almost always poisonous when eaten and poison is harmful when injected. 2-3% as dangerous when eaten vs injected only helps so much.

▲ OptionOfT a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But eating a rattlesnake and dying is a bad way of finding out that you have a stomach ulcer.

▲ Gud 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not pedantic, two different.

Thanks for clarifying.

▲ jeltz 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I am not a native speaker but I believe you are wrong. It is called poison dart for example. So injected toxins can be both called poisons and venoms.

	▲	mrleinad 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In Spanish it's commonly "dardo venenoso" (venomous dart), no "dardo ponzoñoso" (poisonous dart). So it's probably incorrectly used in English.

▲ smohare a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

▲ NedF a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]