3

I don't know the difference between the words 'condemn somebody' and 'sentence someone' in court terminology ane making this question I am going to discover their right place of usage. Which word sounds natural in the following sentence:

  • He was condemned to 100 lashes of the whip.
  • He was sentenced to 100 lashes of the whip.
J.R.
  • 109,547
  • 9
  • 164
  • 291
A-friend
  • 14,286
  • 49
  • 210
  • 404

2 Answers2

7

In most contexts there's no meaningful difference, but a couple of points are worth making. Firstly, note that over the past century there's been a significant shift towards using sentenced rather than condemned, particularly where the "punishment" is meted out by the judicial process.

Also note that figurative usages such as "If I don't pass my exams I'll be condemned to spend the rest of my life working behind the counter at McDonalds" rarely use the "legalistic" term sentenced.

Finally, note that it's quite possible to condemn a person, thing, or idea with the general sense of "strongly disapprove of", but without specifying any particular "punishment". For example,...

I condemn your ignorance and narrow-mindedness.

...where it simply wouldn't be valid English to substitute sentence.

FumbleFingers
  • 70,966
  • 4
  • 97
  • 196
  • Thank you very much FumbleFingers. It was really helpful and informative. ;) Just I though differently; I though “Sentence” is usable everywhere, while “condemn” is only used for serious punishments. It was what I know. Now I know they mean the same, but "sentence is used mostly in judicial matters, while 'condemn' can be used figuratively and as the saying goes it's more open word." – A-friend Apr 03 '15 at 13:55
  • If this question relates to your earlier one about the Holocaust, I should point out that at least some people (certainly including myself) wouldn't be entirely happy with, say, "Six million Jews were sentenced to death by the Nazis", because that would tend to bestow more "legal status" on the process than is justified. – FumbleFingers Apr 03 '15 at 13:57
  • Aha, now I'm following you better. Now Its become clear for me that for some reasons, many people have not reached to a consensus about the details of this catastrophe yet. Thank you FumbleFingers. It was helpful too. – A-friend Apr 03 '15 at 14:02
  • The Holocaust is effectively the archetypal war crime, as *condemned* in no uncertain terms by the Nuremberg Trials (which resulted in a number of active participants being *sentenced* to death). We may have trouble understanding how such an atrocity could have occurred in the first place, but I'm sure civilised people in general are largely in agreement about what actually happened, and how they feel about it. – FumbleFingers Apr 03 '15 at 14:10
  • I have nothing to say. God damn those who causers that occurrence. But regarding your final informative comment, as I understood, it's possible to use "condemned" instead of "sentenced". Right? – A-friend Apr 03 '15 at 14:17
  • Meanwhile as I know, the verb "convict" cannot be used not in my main question nor in other examples of you. Because as I know "one can be convict of doing a crime" and only in a court. Do you agree with this understanding of mine too? :) – A-friend Apr 03 '15 at 14:20
  • @FumbleFingers While I certainly understand the moral reasoning behind your statement of Nazi's sentencing versus condemning Jews, I don't think that's the normal use of the word. It's very common to say things like, "Mr Jones was unjustly sentenced to death for a crime he didn't commit." If the word "sentence" implied that the punishment was just and fair, it would be impossible to use it without expressing an opinion. Your usage would be valid if explained. Like in an article on WW2 you could say, "I refuse to use the word 'sentenced' here because ...", etc and then use "condemned" or ... – Jay Apr 03 '15 at 14:28
  • ... whatever instead. Now perhaps a more "rigorous" case could be made that "sentenced" is inappropriate because someone was never put on trial, but was simply rounded up because he was a Jew. Arguably, without a trial or some sort of judicial proceeding, "sentence" might be an inappropriate word. Like if a policeman shoots someone caught at the scene of a crime -- whether the shooting is justified or not -- we wouldn't say that he "sentenced the man to death". We'd say he was "killed while resisting arrest" or whatever the circumstances are, but not "sentenced". – Jay Apr 03 '15 at 14:31
  • "one can be convict of doing a crime" isn't valid English. At the very least it must be *convicted, but we'd normally say something like one can be convicted for committing a crime. Note that to convict* means prove or declare guilty, which is a separate (earlier) process before any judgement is handed down. – FumbleFingers Apr 03 '15 at 14:31
  • Note that "convict" can be a verb. "The jury will convict him if they are convinced he is guilty." It can also be a noun meaning "someone who has been convicted of a crime", as in, "The convict was sent to prison." BTW when used as a verb, the accent is on the second syllable: con-VICT. When used as a noun, the accent is on the first syllable: CON-vict. – Jay Apr 03 '15 at 14:33
  • @Jay: I didn't mean to suggest sentence/condemn have different implications as regards whether the punishment is "fair and just" as such. Simply that sentence more strongly implies a recognized legal process, which isn't how most of us alive today see the Holocaust.... – FumbleFingers Apr 03 '15 at 14:46
  • ...Note the relative co-occurrence of condemned/sentenced and Nazis/court – FumbleFingers Apr 03 '15 at 14:46
7

In current usage, "sentence" refers to a punishment determined by a court or other legal process. "Condemn" refers to a moral judgment.

"Sentence" always implies a specific punishment, as in, "Mr Brown was sentenced to ten years in prison." You could say someone was sentenced without specifying just what the punishment was, but the understanding would be that there was some specific punishment.

"Condemn" may or may not have any specific punishment. You can say, for example, "The National Prohibition Society strongly condemns all consumption of alcohol." As worded, that statement does not say that they call for making it illegal, just that they say it is a bad thing. (They may indeed want it to be illegal, but that's not what the statement says.) "Condemn" can also be used to describe a punishment that someone suffers, such as "He we condemned to death." It need not be a legal punishment. "Sally's ruthless ambition condemned her to a life of loneliness." You couldn't use "sentence" in that context.

Jay
  • 65,313
  • 1
  • 69
  • 142
  • I think this is a better answer than the accepted answer, and wonder if the O.P. was perhaps too quick to accept an answer. (To add to this answer, though, I think you've deftly explained why He was sentenced to 100 lashes of the whip would the better choice most of the time.) – J.R. Apr 03 '15 at 21:41