Nomenclature of conflicts

Is there really any rhyme or reason to how we name wars? Of course you normally have nation-nation but there's no consistency as to who gets top billing. For example
>Iran-Iraq war
>Anglo-Zanzibar war
>Spanish-American war
>Soviet-Afghan war
Sometimes losers are first, sometimes it's the winner, I thought the shorter name goes first but that's not the case. I don't even want to get into wars named after the place where they're fought or wars that aren't even called wars but are known by their operation name (see: Desert Storm and Just Cause). Is there some kind of pecking order where certain nations always go first or last (it does appear that America is consistently named second in such conflicts)? If so, what is it?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What do you call war or alcohol against my bank account

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Obviously the Bank-Booze war

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Operation Drinking Paycheck.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The troubles.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it is more about phonology and morphology than anything else

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This, reverse all four of OP's examples and see how shitty they sound
      >Iraq-Iran War
      >Zanzibar-Anglo War
      >American-Spanish War
      >Afghan-Soviet War

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Iraq-Iran War
        makes more sense most people walk before they run

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Whatever sounds better.

    I don't really know how to expand on that without sounding completely moronic, But the number of syllibuls, how easily it can be converted into a verb, etc, all go into making it. Just like how english organizes itself in some ways.

    • 1 month ago
      äää

      there are certain phonotactic and prosodic patterns that tend to generalize cleanly across more languages than others. one recent example would be the anglo use of "covid" vs. the euro "corona" in casual speech, which arises because english likes word-initial stress and either a vowel backness or vowel height gradient in disyllabic words, but this doesn't hold for a number of other languages widely spoken in europe. an easy way to intuit why these hyphenated conflict names come out as they do, without a bunch of technical bullshit, is to think about the prosody of female-coded names within a phrase. "Isabel" as used by a stereotypical american or british english speaker has different boundary constraints than the same name used in a sentence by a french or italian speaker.

      There's also a general tendency to end up with hyphenated conflict names that better respect sonority sequencing than their available counterparts, were you to flip the order of the combatants.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Desert Storm
    That's the Gulf War, anon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yes but I've seen many people refer to it as Desert Storm, including veterans of the conflict. Perhaps they're all moronic but it seems like a fairly popular name for it

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Gulf War and Desert Storm became more common terms after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The era after that gets called OIF, and the war with ISIS muddies it up even more.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I thought the name of the aggressor party comes first, but then Iran-Iraq makes no sense.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Iraq-Iran war just doesn't sound right. Wars are named in the way they sound best. That's the reason the 1870 war between France and Prussia is the Franco-Prussian War and not the Prusso-French War.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Did some digging and inferring, not sure if %100 correct.

    Type 1: Nation-Nation:

    kingdom-kingdom of date (picrel) And I believe it looks like the ordering of the nations is based on # of consonants. Nation names with historical context, like anglo,franco,russo are used in that calculation if possible. If the # of consonants are the same, it goes by alphabetical order. Whatever nation goes second uses the non-prefixed name.

    The only exceptions I see is when there are no prefix's available for one nation, but a prefix for another (ex: Russo-Japanese, Sino-Japanese)

    As for the ones involving America, it seems A) its taking the United States of America as the ordering, or it is sticking the nation with the most consonants as the second nation.

    Type 2: Nation-Location :
    -Afghan
    -Zanzibar
    So for things like location, its like a long-notion form of something like the American war in Vietnam or Soviet War in Afghanistan, where its less a cohesive nation fighting another, but a nation coming in to fight for a specific group in the nation itself as a Co-Beligerent in whatever overarching war is occurring there. It represents the subset of the war in which the nation in question took part.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Try saying Ukrainian-Russo war. It is very awkward to pronounce.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    In theory the invader is supposed to be named first but yeah, it's all inconsistent.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If the West is the aggressor it's never listed as a war or called a peacekeeping operation or some shit. If someone else starts it it's a war. Hopes that clears it up for you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Police Action (Korean War).

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *