Why "capture"?
Sort:
Sounds more formal then “BRUTALLY SLAUGHTERED AND THEIR BLOODY, MAULED BODY DRAGGED OFF THE BOARD WITH A POOL OF GUTS AND BLOOD LEAVING BEHIND THEM.” Chess is a very old and formal game
Well the pieces aren’t killed or destroyed, they are removed from the board and out of play. Plus, it might not be inappropriate to use that type of term for Chess.
The word “capture” in chess represents the military origins and the idea of defeating an opponent “army”.
The word “capture” in chess represents the military origins and the idea of defeating an opponent “army”.
a555b666 wrote:
I wonder why we "capture" an opponent's piece, rather that "kill" it, or "disable it" or "persuade it to leave the battlefield". (The last one is a joke). I've read one or two histories of chess without getting an idea of why this is so. Chess is probably a war metaphor (knight).
Because violins is bad.
Mar 16, 2023
0
#6
a555b666 wrote:
I wonder why we "capture" an opponent's piece, rather that "kill" it, or "disable it" or "persuade it to leave the battlefield". (The last one is a joke). I've read one or two histories of chess without getting an idea of why this is so. Chess is probably a war metaphor (knight).
In Spanish, I think they "eat" each other's pieces.
AFAIK.
I wonder why we "capture" an opponent's piece, rather that "kill" it, or "disable it" or "persuade it to leave the battlefield". (The last one is a joke). I've read one or two histories of chess without getting an idea of why this is so. Chess is probably a war metaphor (knight).