Have always wondered about this. This is such an enormously famous quote although the exact choice of words has always perplexed me. Initially figured it is an artifact of translation, but then, wouldn’t you translate it into the new language in a way that is grammatical? Or maybe there is some intention behind this weird phrasing that is just lost on me? I’m not a linguist so eli5
In: 1806
Also in case of the ‘Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds’ quote, Death was personified into physical form by Vishnu in order to convince Arjuna to defend his people against friends turned enemies.
Grammatically it is correct
The phrase “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” is famous because it comes from Robert Oppenheimer, who led the development of the first atomic bomb. However, the phrasing is intentionally somewhat odd and poetic.
Some key points:
1) “I am become” is actually grammatically correct English, though archaic. It means “I have become”. Oppenheimer was quoting from an ancient Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita, so the phrasing is reflecting that. Translating it literally may have lost that poetic effect.
2) “Death” and “destroyer of worlds” are being used metaphorically here to refer to the immense destructive power of nuclear weapons.
3) The odd placement of “death” as a noun modifier is for emphasis and poetic effect. It suggests how Oppenheimer felt like he had created something as powerful as death itself.
4) There is a sense of irony and dread in the quote, as if Oppenheimer is astonished and horrified by what he has created. The unusual phrasing highlights how he has crossed a line into something unimaginably terrible.
5) The quote has endured because it so vividly captures the sobering realization of creating a weapon of such immense, civilization-threatening power. The poetic language packs a punch.
So in short, the quote is intentionally obscure and eerie to highlight the profound significance and dread of that moment. The awkward grammar focuses our attention and leaves a haunting impression. Does this help explain the meaning and intention behind the famous yet peculiar phrase? Let me know if you have any other questions!
“I am become death” was Oppenheimer’s personal translation of the text. It may not have the same meaning as intended by its authors. I always wondered if Oppenheimer took inspiration from Christians’ bad conjugation (e.g., “He is risen.”).
“I am become death” was Oppenheimer’s personal translation of the text. It may not have the same meaning as intended by its authors. I always wondered if Oppenheimer took inspiration from Christians’ bad conjugation (e.g., “He is risen.”).
I’m not sure if this will answer your question or not…
When they exploded the first nuclear device at Alamogordo testing facility, Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientists on the project said ” I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” his quote comes from a piece of Hindu scripture the Bhagavad-Gita.
That was the moment when all his work went from theoretical to actual. It was no longer a concept it was a reality. He had helped create the most powerful weapon known to man (at that point) that could kill people by the thousands. That’s a heavy burden for anyone to carry on their conscience
The phrase “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” is famous because it comes from Robert Oppenheimer, who led the development of the first atomic bomb. However, the phrasing is intentionally somewhat odd and poetic.
Some key points:
1) “I am become” is actually grammatically correct English, though archaic. It means “I have become”. Oppenheimer was quoting from an ancient Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita, so the phrasing is reflecting that. Translating it literally may have lost that poetic effect.
2) “Death” and “destroyer of worlds” are being used metaphorically here to refer to the immense destructive power of nuclear weapons.
3) The odd placement of “death” as a noun modifier is for emphasis and poetic effect. It suggests how Oppenheimer felt like he had created something as powerful as death itself.
4) There is a sense of irony and dread in the quote, as if Oppenheimer is astonished and horrified by what he has created. The unusual phrasing highlights how he has crossed a line into something unimaginably terrible.
5) The quote has endured because it so vividly captures the sobering realization of creating a weapon of such immense, civilization-threatening power. The poetic language packs a punch.
So in short, the quote is intentionally obscure and eerie to highlight the profound significance and dread of that moment. The awkward grammar focuses our attention and leaves a haunting impression. Does this help explain the meaning and intention behind the famous yet peculiar phrase? Let me know if you have any other questions!
The phrase “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” is famous because it comes from Robert Oppenheimer, who led the development of the first atomic bomb. However, the phrasing is intentionally somewhat odd and poetic.
Some key points:
1) “I am become” is actually grammatically correct English, though archaic. It means “I have become”. Oppenheimer was quoting from an ancient Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita, so the phrasing is reflecting that. Translating it literally may have lost that poetic effect.
2) “Death” and “destroyer of worlds” are being used metaphorically here to refer to the immense destructive power of nuclear weapons.
3) The odd placement of “death” as a noun modifier is for emphasis and poetic effect. It suggests how Oppenheimer felt like he had created something as powerful as death itself.
4) There is a sense of irony and dread in the quote, as if Oppenheimer is astonished and horrified by what he has created. The unusual phrasing highlights how he has crossed a line into something unimaginably terrible.
5) The quote has endured because it so vividly captures the sobering realization of creating a weapon of such immense, civilization-threatening power. The poetic language packs a punch.
So in short, the quote is intentionally obscure and eerie to highlight the profound significance and dread of that moment. The awkward grammar focuses our attention and leaves a haunting impression. Does this help explain the meaning and intention behind the famous yet peculiar phrase? Let me know if you have any other questions!
I’m not sure if this will answer your question or not…
When they exploded the first nuclear device at Alamogordo testing facility, Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientists on the project said ” I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” his quote comes from a piece of Hindu scripture the Bhagavad-Gita.
That was the moment when all his work went from theoretical to actual. It was no longer a concept it was a reality. He had helped create the most powerful weapon known to man (at that point) that could kill people by the thousands. That’s a heavy burden for anyone to carry on their conscience
I’m not sure if this will answer your question or not…
When they exploded the first nuclear device at Alamogordo testing facility, Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientists on the project said ” I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” his quote comes from a piece of Hindu scripture the Bhagavad-Gita.
That was the moment when all his work went from theoretical to actual. It was no longer a concept it was a reality. He had helped create the most powerful weapon known to man (at that point) that could kill people by the thousands. That’s a heavy burden for anyone to carry on their conscience
I’m surprised no one yet mentioned French (and other Latin rooted languages). There are a set of verbs that use “to be” as their auxiliary. DR MRS VANDERTRAMP is a strategy to help French learners remember some verbs which use être as an auxiliary verb.
They’re basically all about movement or change in state, and they all take ‘to be’ instrad of ‘to have’ for the past tense.
The very first one is “devenir” or to become.
This structure is a rememant of Latin when it heavily influenced Early Modern English – where we get works like Chaucer and King James Bible.
TL;DR — “I am become” is old-timey like “thou” because it was codified (frozen) in early modern English texts. It’s based on Latin grammar that used “to be” for certain auxiliary verbs of movement.
Latest Answers