<p>它(修昔底德的傑作)以一次內戰為题目，敘述它(內戰)的來源和發展。</p>
<p>Let's translate and compare:</p>
<p>它(內戰)的來源 - Where the civil war originally was coming from?</p>
<p>它(內戰)的根源 - Where the civil war originally was rooted?</p>
<p>You can see the difference between the two, and notice that both are illogical. Because, even though I haven't read the book, it seems the book describes &quot;how&quot; the war (reasoning) started and its development afterward, not &quot;from where&quot;, or &quot;where&quot;, the war started.</p>
<p>In here &quot;起原&quot;, &quot;根原&quot;, &quot;原由&quot;, all would be a better choice because they express the sense of &quot;root reason&quot;, or &quot;root cause&quot;.</p>
<p>Lastly, I think you know well that repeating the same pronoun in a sentence with each refers to a different object is a &quot;no-no&quot; in writing.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-24T15:44:42.810Z
Yes. Now that you say it, the double 它 is a painfully obvious mistake. Funny, what one does,  when one is struggling with the language. :(
Ludi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-24T15:35:02.950Z
2021-09-24T15:35:02.950Z
r13
<p>来 - come</p>
<p>源 - source (literally: source of water)</p>
<p>来源 = source</p>
<p>e.g. 美國毒品的主要来源是墨西哥 (the main source of illegal drugs in the US is Mexico)</p>
<p>~</p>
<p>根 - root</p>
<p>根源 = root cause; origin</p>
<p>e.g. 欲望是犯罪的根源  (desire is the root cause of crime)</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>「修昔底德陷阱」也來源於此。</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is better to replace 也來源於此 with 也是源出於此</p>
<p>源出 = <strong>origin from</strong>;  source from ; cause by</p>
<p><em>根源 is a noun, not a good choice in this context</em></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-24T15:49:22.637Z
Thank you! We are taking here about the part 来源和发展。for the 来源于此 I opened a separate question!
Ludi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-24T15:35:15.573Z
2021-09-24T15:42:16.777Z
2021-09-24T15:42:16.777Z
Tang Ho
<p>Recently, on a language exchange platform, I tried to describe one of my favourite books (Thucidides, from which I had to learn a lot of passages) as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>我所喜歡的書頗多，包含古希臘的經文在內。比如說希臘歷史學家修昔底德的傑作《伯羅奔尼撒戰爭》。它以一次內戰為题目，敘述它的來源和發展。大家討論的「修昔底德陷阱」也來源於此。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Native speakers made several corrections, but I think it is more useful for future users if I split them into different questions.</p>
<p>One of the corrections was that 来源  in 來源和發展 was replaced with 根源。How can I understand the difference of these, so as to pick the correct one in the feature? In English “origins of the Cold War” is a wide spread phrase. Should I pick 根源 whenever I am talking about <strong>causal</strong> origins?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-24T23:52:09.210Z
"敘述它的來源和發展", I feel nothing wrong with the use of 来源 here. On the contrary, 敘述它的根源和發展 sounds a bit off. Probably, 起源 is more formal in this case.
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-09-25T02:32:26.423Z
「一次」 in 「一次內戰」can and should be eliminated.
joehua
<word-choice>
When to use 来源 and when to use 根源
# When to use 来源 and when to use 根源

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-09-24)

Recently, on a language exchange platform, I tried to describe one of my favourite books (Thucidides, from which I had to learn a lot of passages) as follows:

> 我所喜歡的書頗多，包含古希臘的經文在內。比如說希臘歷史學家修昔底德的傑作《伯羅奔尼撒戰爭》。它以一次內戰為题目，敘述它的來源和發展。大家討論的「修昔底德陷阱」也來源於此。

Native speakers made several corrections, but I think it is more useful for future users if I split them into different questions.

One of the corrections was that 来源 in 來源和發展 was replaced with 根源。How can I understand the difference of these, so as to pick the correct one in the feature? In English “origins of the Cold War” is a wide spread phrase. Should I pick 根源 whenever I am talking about **causal** origins?

**Tags:** word-choice

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "敘述它的來源和發展", I feel nothing wrong with the use of 来源 here. On the contrary, 敘述它的根源和發展 sounds a bit off. Probably, 起源 is more formal in this case.  
> **username_2**: 「一次」 in 「一次內戰」can and should be eliminated.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2021-09-24. Score: 1

它(修昔底德的傑作)以一次內戰為题目，敘述它(內戰)的來源和發展。

Let's translate and compare:

它(內戰)的來源 - Where the civil war originally was coming from?

它(內戰)的根源 - Where the civil war originally was rooted?

You can see the difference between the two, and notice that both are illogical. Because, even though I haven't read the book, it seems the book describes "how" the war (reasoning) started and its development afterward, not "from where", or "where", the war started.

In here "起原", "根原", "原由", all would be a better choice because they express the sense of "root reason", or "root cause".

Lastly, I think you know well that repeating the same pronoun in a sentence with each refers to a different object is a "no-no" in writing.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Yes. Now that you say it, the double 它 is a painfully obvious mistake. Funny, what one does,  when one is struggling with the language. :(  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2021-09-24. Score: 1

来 - come

源 - source (literally: source of water)

来源 = source

e.g. 美國毒品的主要来源是墨西哥 (the main source of illegal drugs in the US is Mexico)

~

根 - root

根源 = root cause; origin

e.g. 欲望是犯罪的根源 (desire is the root cause of crime)

> *「修昔底德陷阱」也來源於此。*

It is better to replace 也來源於此 with 也是源出於此

源出 = **origin from**; source from ; cause by

*根源 is a noun, not a good choice in this context*

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you! We are taking here about the part 来源和发展。for the 来源于此 I opened a separate question!  

---

