German nachvollziehenTo comprehend / retrace.

Actually, this does translate, but with a multitude of words that I was not quite aware of until Inchecked several dictionaries, wiktionary, dict.cc and finally pons.com. Pons offers the circumscription *to relate to sth.*, which I would deem a preferable metonym that I needed to understand the more technical *retrace* (on which all three agree), which was what I actually needed. I had written a whole lot about the surface analysis of *nach* + *vollziehen*,*voll* + *ziehen* and tentative comparisons for *ziehen*, but the argument of Etymological Fallacy would easily hold up against it. Unfortunately it is the case that many notranslates, so to speak, really only aim for a one size fits all word for word translation, although a diversified lexicon is no less sofisticated. I mean, the diversion helps to recognize inflational usage in the source language, which is a real concern when I am using it. Now I was using Enish instead, and was dumbfoundex. Maybe I should elaborate. In German you could use one unique word indiscriminately for understanding a certain sentiment (comprehend, relate), reproducing a certain effect (retrace, reconstruct; add *reprodue*, not found in those sources) and then some.^(1) Morphology: *voll-* would have to be formally equivalent to *full*, indicating completion as in *fullfill*. The adverbial preposition *nach* kind of implies attention in the temporal domain, for lack of a better word. *ziehen* seems to be the actual verbal head, but its primary tranation in view of established etymology is "to tug", which makes no sense at all. That's where I had stopped my first draft, because *nach* is nigh impossible to translate.^(2) (PS: actually, re- comes close) 1: Anyhow, the synonymy feels plausible, because *man is the measure of all things* (attributed to DaVinci, if I remember correctly). Whether a detective retraces the steps of a murderer, or a language historian reconstructs the original meaning of *nachvollziehen*, or you relate to my writing, it will inevitably involve some amount of following the thought process of the subjects under study, as long as human human agency is at the source of the problem. However, it can also be said of, for example, geological processes, simply because of the semantic widening, which is naively summed up as ending with *understanding*. The surface analysis does suggest agency neverthess, because of *vollziehen*. I'm reluctant to consult a dictionary on that one, because where is the fun in that, but I am affraid "to execute" is a poor excuse for a gloss, although it matches particularly well in case of the related *Straf-Vollzug* (penetention(ary), *Strafe* "penalty"), in light of *execution* as most sever form of penalty. That said, its probably coincidence. Pons offers only *to carry out sth.* (which I do use as such), but otherwise rests on collocated verbs for given nouns in set phrases. Wiktionary more verbosely offers synonyms ti *carry out*, like *accomplish*, treats *consumate (marriage)* as separate definition though the death penalty is treated under the general sense, and omits *execute*, and adds a third point, «(reflexive, formal) to proceed, happen (in some fashion)» 2: It is akin to *nah* "near*, *nähst* "nearest", *nächst* "next" (easily confused), and *nachher* "later". You surely noticed the odd one out. I started to argue that *nach* should be a rebracketing from *nachher*, but confused myself by calling into question the validity of *her*, formally akin to *hier* "here", thus contrasting with *vorher* "before", ie. "after/before now". It is often collocated with *noch*, that doesnottranslate either, and is not exactly akin, eg. *ich habe nachher noch zu ...* ~ as though *I have later-on still to...*, "I still have to ... later on", in my own words. Compounding with *her*, which stems from *K, should explain the uvular /naxer/, similar to how the trailing s preserved the velar in *next* and German *Dachs* "badger" (*tahso), making *nächster* /nekster ~ nexster/ pretty damn close to *(et) cetera*. But I would suggest that, alternatively, it can be reconstructed from the suffix *-eyeri (cf. wiki: *under*), if *book* ~ *Buch,* and what not is held as evidence that *ch* follows regularly. May that as it be.