2

For example, rausschmeissen and rauswerfen are used interchangeably in sentences below:

Der Chef will sie rausschmeissen, weil sie ständig zu spät kommt.
Der Chef will sie rauswerfen, weil sie ständig zu spät kommt.

Is there a situation in which I should pick rauswerfen in favour of rausschmeißen or vice verse?

4

Both words differ only in minimal nuances, so it is rather a question of style or personal preference.
If you use it in the literal meaning of throwing an object, I would pick rauswerfen, because werfen is the normal word for to throw, while schmeißen is more colloquial.
However, the use for firing someone from the job is colloquial for both words (the normal word would be kündigen, which, btw, takes the person to be fired in dative case instead of accusative), so there is no factual reason to pick one over the other.

  • Yes, although I would say that they are both colloquial and should accordingly be avoided when it comes to writing formal texts (CVs etc). – Nico Feb 2 at 6:12
  • You can also say "jemanden kündigen", but this seems to be judged as colloquial or Austrian German, see DWDS or here. So, in the passive voice without agent, you can say "ihm wurde gekündigt" as well as "er wurde gekündigt". – Ralf Joerres Feb 4 at 0:50
3

werfen

means to move something somewhere with momentum (through the air): to throw

schmeißen

is colloquial and means to throw sth., often with affect, out of inattention, with momentum, emphasis

Since rauswerfen is already colloquial for jemanden entlassen, you can see rausschmeißen as a way to stress discontent.

Saying: "Den habe ich rausgeschmissen.", stresses the force that the speaker would have liked to use if he would have literally kicked them out.

Saying: "Die haben mich rausgeschmissen.", shows ones discontent about having been treated poorly. If you find your dismissal reasonable, you would rather say: "Die haben mich rausgeworfen." or "Die haben mich entlassen."

Since colloquial speech depends heavily on style and personal preference, please don't take me to court for saying that.

1

Same thing. Don't bother with the difference, it is almost none. For practical communication it is really no difference.

  • Das stimmt, normalerweise bevorzuge ich rausschmeissen, weil ich dieses Wort häufiger höre. – Anatolii Feb 2 at 21:09
-3

compare di-smiss, dis-miss?

Also cp Schmiss "trash, stuff", Schmeiß-Fliege "drosophila" (dew lowe, a.k.a. house fly), and schmieren, English to smear, smear campaign "deface, denigrate"; given dismiss cp to mete and I don't know what; also niederschmettern, to smite, abschmettern (of law suits).


Whichever way it went, rausschmeißen is chiefly denigrating.

rauswerfen, verwerfen, etc are not exactly positively connotated, but slightly less derogatory. Perhaps it's distantly relatrd to rufen, cp in Verruf geraten, opposite of Beruf and guter Ruf; That is, if the basic root, *weH meant to turn, change, the apparent relation to werfen and warp might be coincidental.

Either invokes the visual metaphor of hurling someone, e.g. out of the saloon.

As in English (e.g. "to let go"), euphemisms are usually sought to maintain politeness, kündigen, etw. entziehen, bitten zu gehen, ...

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.