concur

The English word 'concur' entered the language around 1425, from Latin 'concurrere' (to run together, to converge, to clash).‌​‍​‍​‌​‍​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍​‍​‌​‍​‌​‌​‍​‍​‍​‍​‌​‍​‍​‍​‍​‌​‌​‍​‌​‍​‍​‌​‍ The Latin verb combines 'con-' (together) and 'currere' (to run), producing the literal image of running together — multiple entities moving toward the same point at the same time.

In classical Latin, 'concurrere' had several distinct applications. Crowds concurred — ran together — at a spectacle or a riot. Rivers concurred — flowed together — at a confluence. Armies concurred — clashed — on a battlefield (running together in hostile collision). Events concurred — happened simultaneously — when they coincided in time. The word was versatile, covering convergence in space, time, and action, whether peaceful or violent.

English inherited several of these senses but emphasized two above the others: agreement and simultaneity. To concur with someone is to share their opinion — your minds run together, arriving at the same conclusion. Events that concur happen at the same time — they run together temporally. The combative sense (running together to clash) largely disappeared from English 'concur,' though it survives in the French cognate 'concourir' (to compete, literally to run together in a race) and in the English word 'concourse' (a place where people run together, a gathering point).

The adjective 'concurrent' (happening at the same time, existing simultaneously) has become especially important in legal, technical, and computing contexts. Concurrent sentences in criminal law run together — a defendant serving two concurrent ten-year sentences serves ten years, not twenty, because the sentences run at the same time. Concurrent computing involves multiple processes running together simultaneously. Concurrent jurisdiction means two courts have authority over the same matter at the same time.

In legal writing, 'concur' has a specific technical meaning. When a judge issues a 'concurring opinion,' they agree with the majority's result but arrive there by different reasoning. The minds concur — run to the same destination — but take different paths. This is distinguished from a 'dissenting opinion,' where the judge's mind runs to a different destination entirely. The concurring/dissenting framework in appellate law is a beautiful instantiation of the Latin spatial metaphor.

The noun 'concurrence' (agreement; simultaneous occurrence) dates to the fifteenth century. 'Concourse' (from Latin 'concursus,' a running together) entered English as a word for a gathering of people or a place where they gather — a train station concourse is literally a place where travelers run together. The word has also been used for the confluence of rivers and the convergence of events.

The competitive sense of 'concurrere' — running together in a race — survives most clearly in French and Spanish. French 'concours' means a competition or competitive examination. Spanish 'concurso' means a contest. English 'concours' (as in 'concours d'élégance,' a competition for the most elegant car or horse) is borrowed from French and preserves the original Latin sense of running together in rivalry.

Within the 'currere' family, 'concur' is defined by togetherness. Where 'occur' runs toward, 'recur' runs back, 'incur' runs into, and 'excursion' runs out, 'concur' runs together. The prefix 'con-' gives the word its distinctive quality of convergence — the meeting of separate paths, the joining of separate streams, the alignment of separate minds. Whether in a courtroom, a computing system, or a casual conversation, 'concur' describes the moment when things that were running separately begin to run as one.