What is the difference between words wood and forest in English?
Printable View
What is the difference between words wood and forest in English?
Size, usually. A forest is large, a wood is small.
Since 'large' and 'small' aren't absolute, however, there is plenty of room for overlap.
Remarkable. I always thought otherwise :lol: Wood is large and forest is small :)Quote:
Originally Posted by scotcher
Me too. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
and me
wood: the hard, fibrous substance composing most of the stem and branches of a tree or shrub, and lying beneath the bark; the xylem.
Can also mean lumber.
woods: Often, woods. (used with a singular or plural verb) a large and thick collection of growing trees; a grove or forest: They picnicked in the woods.
From dictionary.com
Scott
Ever heard of an equitorial rainwood? :)Quote:
Remarkable. I always thought otherwise Wood is large and forest is small
If you are going to quote a dictionary site, at least get it right. The actual entry is:Quote:
Originally Posted by fortheether
The way you wrote it suggested that wood and woods were distinct entries, wheras in fact they fell under the same entry to show that they can be entirely synonymous.Quote:
Wood
7. Often, woods. (used with a singular or plural verb) a large and thick collection of growing trees; a grove or forest: They picnicked in the woods.
I have a little place along the edge of my land that I call the woods. It's about 30' wide and 200' long.
In the US we don't use the word 'wood' to mean small forest, or whatever. It's 'woods' only.
About North Carolina we always say it's a forest waiting to happen - whenever then mow down the brush at the side of the road it's not long before those pesky pinetrees are poking their way up.
Down South, "woods" and "forest" are the same. Moreover, "woods" is a more common word than "forest"
hey chas.. How about all those National Forests? They ain't no woods. "woods" is smaller. The two words ain't always interchangeable.
Joyce Kilmer Memorial Woods, http://main.nc.us/graham/hiking/joycekil.html
Nat'l forest is fine. I still stick with "woods" for any other ... well, woods!Quote:
Originally Posted by chaika
In my neighborhood, they say "woods" when they refer to any heavy tree and bush combination.
In my mind "wood" is associated with coniferous or deciduous forests, while "forest" can be anything.
Hey... you've just described any forest there is:-). Woods=heavy brush +trees.Quote:
Originally Posted by basurero
Well, I wouldn't call a tropical rainforest a "wood".Quote:
Originally Posted by charlestonian
Hey... I say woods, you say forest.... Really, it don't make no difference. Just, down South, we say "woods" (not 'wood', keep in mind)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
A rain forest is a rain forest... I was talking about our 'woods"Quote:
Originally Posted by basurero
Hey, just call it what you want... but if you ran into a word "woods", just don't be surprised, it is a word for "forest":-)... with some difference. I don't think they have "woods" in Russia... Russians have forest, when there is not much growth between trees. .. Woods are different... there is a brush between trees...
What are we arguing about? I call it woods, you call it forest... No problem.
I wonder if Brits use the term "woods" the same way americans do... Anybody???
Speaking of which... why is it called rainforest? What has it to do with rain?Quote:
Originally Posted by basurero
Because they are found in regions near the equator where it is very humid and rains a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
By the way, what do you make of "the bush"? This is the one I use most frequently.
As I said, woods are small, forests are large, but there is plenty of overlap between them since 'small' and 'large' depend on what you are comparing them to. Also, due to this distinction, 'woods' has a somehow less imposing, less serious ring to it than 'forest'. Or maybe I just read to much Winnie-the-Pooh when I was a kid.Quote:
Originally Posted by charlestonian
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
A little bit thin, but makes sense I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by basurero
Me? I don't quite follow. What do I make of "the bush"?Quote:
By the way, what do you make of "the bush"? This is the one I use most frequently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotcher
I wrote it that way to show that there is a difference between wood and woods. The original question was:
What is the difference between words wood and forest in English?
If in your answer:
Size, usually. A forest is large, a wood is small.
Since 'large' and 'small' aren't absolute, however, there is plenty of room for overlap.
you change this sentence:
A forest is large, a wood is small.
to:
A forest is large, woods are small.
Your answer would then be correct. You cannot use the word "wood" the way that you did. That's all I was trying to point out. If I am wrong please show me an example.
Scott
I know you did, but you're wrong, there isn't (necessarily), as the link you originally posted correctly stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortheether
My answer was correct already, so there was no need to change it.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortheether
Yes, I absolutely, categorically can.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortheether
You posted a bloomin' example yourself!Quote:
Originally Posted by fortheether
Or from further down the same page:Quote:
wood /wʊd/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[wood] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the hard, fibrous substance composing most of the stem and branches of a tree or shrub, and lying beneath the bark; the xylem.
2. the trunks or main stems of trees as suitable for architectural and other purposes; timber or lumber.
3. firewood.
4. the cask, barrel, or keg, as distinguished from the bottle: aged in the wood.
5. wood block (def. 1).
6. Music. a. a woodwind instrument.
b. the section of a band or orchestra composed of woodwinds.
7. Often, woods. (used with a singular or plural verb) a large and thick collection of growing trees; a grove or forest: They picnicked in the woods.
My allusion to Winnie-the-Pooh earlier hinted at another one, the place where WtP lived was Hundred Acre Wood, not Hundred Acre Woods.Quote:
wood1 (wd) Pronunciation Key
n.
2
a) A dense growth of trees or underbrush covering a relatively small or confined area. Often used in the plural.
b) A forest. Often used in the plural.
I strongly suggest you brush up on your own English vocabulary before you start correcting other people's.
My allusion to Winnie-the-Pooh earlier hinted at another one, the place where WtP lived was Hundred Acre Wood, not Hundred Acre Woods.Quote:
Originally Posted by scotcher
I strongly suggest you brush up on your own English vocabulary before you start correcting other people's.[/quote:1f1s8ocb]
I am from the USA. Using the word "wood" the way you do is not proper "American" English. The phrase "Hundres Acre Wood" sounds wrong to me. I do not speak "British" English. If using "wood" in that way is a "British" English thing then excuse my ignorance. Winnie-the-Poo is written by:
Alan Alexander Milne (January 18, 1882 – January 31, 1956), also known as A. A. Milne, was a British author, best known for his books about the teddy bear, Winnie-the-Pooh, and for various children's poems. Milne was a noted writer, primarily as a playwright, before the huge success of Pooh overshadowed all his previous work.
The statement "A forest is large, a wood is small." is not proper "American" English. An example of "wood" and "woods" by an American:
Dave (by cell phone): Where are you?
Bill: I'm in the woods.
Dave: What are you doing?
Bill: Getting some wood to build a fire.
Looking through:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest
I do not see "wood" used in the "British" way.
Scott
Scott,
"wood" and "woods" mean the same thing in British English - a more or less smallish group of trees and brush.
American English only uses "woods" nowadays, but I'm pretty sure if you go back a couple hundred years you will find "wood" used here too.
Here's an example of this usage, probably to add a nuance of quaintness, from Wisconsin: http://www.houseinthewood.org/
Do a Google search for "in the wood" to check this.
British English versus American English. :wall:
Chaika, Fortheeter, Charlestonian are correct.
American English...
"I'm going into the woods/forest now to catch my supper (I hope a rabbit!)... and I'll cook my supper over a wood fire."
Woods (usually smaller)... Forest (usually bigger)... Wood (substance, material from a tree). In America. :wink:
IMHO woods = forest, they are synonyms.
The only difference is "woods" is more informal than "forest".
American Forest Preseration Committee - sounds fine
American Woods Preservation Committee - sounds awkward
From a children's song:
Over the river and through the woods to grandmother's house we go - sounds fine
Over the river and through the forest to grandmother's house we go - sounds awkward, sounds too serious like a 10 kilometer journey on foot to get to grandma's house
...
I see Woods and Forest as 2 different things.
I will try to explain.
Example:
I may go camping in a National Forest, but that would be the extent that I would use "Forest".
We are going camping in the XYZ Forest, from there on I would use Woods. Because I cant camp the whole forest.
Once we get to an area someone could ask "where are we going to set up camp?" Well right there in the woods.
If someone states they need the bathroom I would say, go into the woods! Meaning go to where all the trees are so nobody could see you etc.. Sorry I had to use that example but thats the way I use woods vs forest.
Daddy can we go for a walk? Yes but dont pass those woods! I want to be able to see you.
Where does that trail lead? It leads into the woods.
I can go on and on. But I hope you get what I am stating.
Also Wood is used here like crazy, it referrs to the timber taken from a tree and readied for a fire. So those folks who live where it is cold always have to go for wood in the woods. They will place the wood outside and bring it in when necessary.
"Honey go get some wood and start a fire, I am freezing" blah blah blah.
Scott
Is this forum called "American English for Russians?"
No, it is not, it is simply called English for Russians, which means all varieties are welcome. You are of course free to point out any differences there may between the different varieties, but since your knowledge of said other varieties is so self-evidently poor, you really should check to see whether such a difference exists each time you decide to 'correct' another native English speaker.
After that, it might be a good idea to learn to read dictionary entries properly, so that you do not fall into the trap again of assuming that the dictionary entry you are using to support your 'correction' is somehow wrong, forcing you to 'correct' the dictionary. That is assuming that you did that out of (Moderated. L.) rather than dishonesty. I'm certainly willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Now, either stop being an (Moderated. L.). Either is fine by me.
Scott...
No worries. :wink:
Scotcher is absolutely correct... this forum covers the wide, wide world of English... Australian, Canadian, U.K., Scottish, Irish... and occasionally American. :wink:
I sometimes forget this fact. I trust Scotcher, DDT, Charlestonian, VM, and many others to remind me when I screw up... and then I must buy them all a pint... Cheers, mates! :lol:
Forestой = Forestою!!!