I was in Paris recently for a meeting about motives or motifs, and since I'm too jet lagged
for real work let me ask the following somewhat frivolous question. The word "motif" is
usually translated as "motive" in English. However, I wonder if this is really the best choice. "Motive" has, for me, a primarily psychological meaning, whereas "motif" -- which is
a perfectly good English word -- means pattern or theme. I guess my question is which word better captures the intended meaning?


Incidentally, it appears that this usage of "motive" goes back to Grothendieck himself, cf."Standard conjectures on algebraic cycles". So perhaps, one should allow him to have the last word and not question his motives, which have wonderful if unintended consequences.



Motives versus Motifs
Dear Donu, here are Grothendieck's own words:


"Contrary to what occurs in ordinary
topology, one finds oneself confronting
a disconcerting abundance of different
cohomological theories. One has the
distinct impression (but in a sense that
remains vague) that each of these theories
“amount to the same thing”, that
they “give the same results”. In order to
express this intuition, of the kinship of
these different cohomological theories,
I formulated the notion of “motive” associated
to an algebraic variety. By this
term, I want to suggest that it is the
“common motive” (or “common reason”)
behind this multitude of cohomological
invariants attached to an
algebraic variety, or indeed, behind all
cohomological invariants that are a
priori possible"


They can be found in his autobiographical "Récoltes et Semailles", where there is also an allusion to a musical meaning of "motif". 


The translation is Barry Mazur's in his article "What is... a Motive?" which is, needless to say, a fascinating short survey (plus bibliography) .Here is the reference:


<http://www.ams.org/notices/200410/what-is.pdf>


