Questions about German Thread

Discussion of natural languages, or language in general.
User avatar
Imralu
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Imralu »

linguoboy wrote:It might be worth noting here that, colloquially, I've heard Entschuldigung abbreviated to Tschuldigung. (Of course, this doesn't mean it's not still a cluster--I've also heard es tut abbreviated to 'stut.)
I pronounce It's mine as tsmine.
awer wrote:A question:
Why the weird verb order in this sentence?:
"Und glaubst du wirklich, dass ich hier sitzen und mit dir sprechen würde, wenn ich ihm keine befriedigenden Antworten hätte geben können?"
It was translated from: "And do you really think that, had I not been able to give satisfactory answers, I would be sitting here talking to you?”"
Why not "geben können hätte"?
When I was learning German, I found genders unnecessarily complicate learning vocabulary, cases were hard but I got the hang of them eventually and now I love them, adjective endings are needlessly complicated but when I got through that, I felt like I had achieved something. Word order was something that just made sense to me after a while until I got to this weird little wrinkle. I find German word order is such an unusual and beautiful pattern and I started to feel it instinctively and then ... there's this little spanner thrown into the works. *screams WHYYYY at the sky* I'm usually OK with it now though and get it right without thinking most of the time, but sometimes I forget to put -st, -n or -t on the hätte or hatte in this position to make it agree with the subject and I think it's because my brain still hasn't fully figured out that this is the finite verb ... it's not at the end and it's not in the second position, so why would it be? *shakes fist at German*

Just checking: This word order also happens with werden and two infinitives, right? ... weil ich morgen nicht werde kommen können. Correct? It so rarely appears that I can't quite remember the rule, if it's impossible, possible or obligatory with werden. I know other than that, it's used with haben when there is an Ersatzinfinitiv (infinitive that replaces the past participle) because for some reason, Ersatzinfinitive want to come at the very end of the clause, but since werden requires an infinitve anyway, there are no Ersatzinfinitive so ... *munches on Pretzel*
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific
________
MY MUSIC

hwhatting
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2315
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by hwhatting »

Imralu wrote: Just checking: This word order also happens with werden and two infinitives, right? ... weil ich morgen nicht werde kommen können. Correct? It so rarely appears that I can't quite remember the rule, if it's impossible, possible or obligatory with werden. I know other than that, it's used with haben when there is an Ersatzinfinitiv (infinitive that replaces the past participle) because for some reason, Ersatzinfinitive want to come at the very end of the clause, but since werden requires an infinitve anyway, there are no Ersatzinfinitive so ... *munches on Pretzel*
nicht werde kommen können is correct, but here the order nicht kommen können werde is also possible, and it's the one I'd prefer.

User avatar
GreenBowTie
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 179
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 3:17 am
Location: the darkest depths of the bone-chilling night

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by GreenBowTie »

what's the difference between jetzt and nun?

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by linguoboy »

GreenBowTie wrote:what's the difference between jetzt and nun?
This is a decent introduction to the difference. I tend to think of nun as more a filler word than a true temporal adverb.

ETA: Of course the German language Wiktionary entries give more information. Here are the examples for nun:

[1] „Was haben wir nun?“
[2] „Was wird nun geschehen?“
[3] Das ist nun geschehen.
[4] Nun ziehen Sie die Schraube fest.
[5] Nun... es ist wahr.
[6] Nun, was ist deine Entscheidung?

And here are those for jetzt:

[1] Ich habe jetzt keine Zeit.
[1] Willst du jetzt endlich aufstehen?
[1] So, jetzt kannst du liegen bleiben.
[1] Jetzt ist der unmöglichen Vergangenheit Zukunft!
[2] Ich denke jetzt anders darüber, als ich es früher gemacht habe.

Only in the first three or four examples for nun could jetzt replace it. I think nun works for all the jetzt examples (except possibly the last one), albeit with a different in nuance. I'm curious what the native speakers say, but to my ear, nun is less forceful and immediate than jetzt. "Willst du jetzt endlich aufstehen?" sounds more peeved to my ear than "Willst du nun endlich aufstehen?", almost an indirect command whereas the version with nun borders on mere suggestion.

Cedh
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Cedh »

linguoboy wrote:
GreenBowTie wrote:what's the difference between jetzt and nun?
This is a decent introduction to the difference. I tend to think of nun as more a filler word than a true temporal adverb.

[...]

I'm curious what the native speakers say, but to my ear, nun is less forceful and immediate than jetzt. "Willst du jetzt endlich aufstehen?" sounds more peeved to my ear than "Willst du nun endlich aufstehen?", almost an indirect command whereas the version with nun borders on mere suggestion.
I agree with your general impression. What I'd like to add is that nun sounds much more literary and somewhat old-fashioned to me. In all the situations where both words are grammatically possible, I would probably only ever use jetzt, at least in speech. (And in the last two examples with nun, where jetzt is not possible, I would likely replace it with also, whose closest translation would be something like "well, ...".) That's partly a regional thing though; IME nun is used much more often in the south than it is in the central and northern areas.

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

Something from duolingo:
Wir moegen ihr alle [from memory, sorry if this is wrong] for 'we all like him'.
Instead of 'wir alle'. I guess this is using 'alle' as an adverb, essentially... but we can't really do that in English, at least not so unmarkedly.

Why does German do this (or more accurately I guess 'when', 'with what'). Is using the 'alle' to directly modify 'wir' actually wrong, or just unidiomatic? And how would you say 'we like them all', or 'we all like all of them'?
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

Cedh
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Cedh »

Salmoneus wrote:Something from duolingo:
Wir moegen ihr alle [from memory, sorry if this is wrong] for 'we all like him'.
Instead of 'wir alle'. I guess this is using 'alle' as an adverb, essentially... but we can't really do that in English, at least not so unmarkedly.

Why does German do this (or more accurately I guess 'when', 'with what'). Is using the 'alle' to directly modify 'wir' actually wrong, or just unidiomatic?
It should be Wir mögen ihn alle (ihr is either 2pl.nom or 3sg.f.gen or 3pl.gen, so it can't be used in direct object position), but yes, this construction is not only possible but actually very common. Wir alle mögen ihn is in common use too though. There is not much of a difference in meaning or register IMO - maybe the version with wir ... alle sounds a little bit more idiomatic and colloquial, and the version with wir alle ... sounds a little bit more formal and somehow seems to emphasize that wir refers to a fairly large group of people. (This last point kind of disappears though if you use the semantically dual beide instead of alle, obviously.)
And how would you say 'we like them all'?
Wir mögen sie alle, which is of course ambiguous between 'we like them all', 'we all like them', and 'we all like her'. Not usually a problem though.
or 'we all like all of them'?
A literal translation would be Wir alle mögen sie alle, but this sounds stilted so I'd be more likely to use an alternative construction like e.g. Wir alle mögen alle von denen.

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

Thanks [and no-one can prove that 'ihr' wasn't a typo!] - but why does this (moving the adjective to be an adverb at the end of the sentence) happen?
Can it happen with any modifer on the subject? Any qualifier? Determiner?

Also, what about the english calque, "Alle von uns..." instead? Is that grammatical? Idiomatic?
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by linguoboy »

Salmoneus wrote:Thanks [and no-one can prove that 'ihr' wasn't a typo!] - but why does this (moving the adjective to be an adverb at the end of the sentence) happen?
How do we know it's an "adjective" in the collocation "wir alle"? This looks to me rather like two pronouns in apposition. Consider:

"Alle mögen ihn."
"Wir, du und ich, mögen ihn."
"Wir mögen ihn, du und ich."
"Wir, die ganze Meute, mögen ihn."
"Wir mögen ihn, die ganze Meute."

As for why it happens? German syntax shows an overriding preference for having only one element in initial position. If "wir alle" is--as I suspect--two NPs in apposition rather than one, then the reluctance to cram both into the front field makes perfect sense.

Cedh
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Cedh »

What LB said. Also:
Salmoneus wrote:what about the english calque, "Alle von uns..." instead? Is that grammatical? Idiomatic?
Yes, that's both grammatical and idiomatic.

User avatar
Imralu
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Imralu »

I never found this "alle" or "beide" elsewhere in the sentence business that strange, but was ... alles was strange for me.

Wir zeigen euch, was wir alles können. (≈ alles, was wir können)
... was wir damals alles für absolut notwendig hielten
... was ich als Kind alles erlebt habe.
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific
________
MY MUSIC

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

Small question: worueber vs wovon. Any difference?
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by linguoboy »

Salmoneus wrote:Small question: worueber vs wovon. Any difference?
Principally in collocation, but that's true of many prepositions, isn't it?

hwhatting
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2315
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by hwhatting »

linguoboy wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:Small question: worueber vs wovon. Any difference?
Principally in collocation, but that's true of many prepositions, isn't it?
To expand that a bit, wovon is the interrogative / relative pronoun relating to phrases governed by von, while worüber is the interrogative / relative pronoun relating to phrases governed by über.
E.g.:
Wovon handelt das Buch? Es handelt von einem Mann, der seinen Schatten verkauft. "What's the book about? It's about a man who sells his shadow."
Worüber redet er gerade? Er redet über den Weltfrieden. "What's he talking about? He's talking about world peace."
So the real question is "what's the difference between using von or über in construction / situation X." They overlap when talking about content, like in the examples above, and sometimes their use is triggered by a certain word (e.g. IMD, handeln takes von, but there are people who say handeln über (to me that sounds colloquial / uneducated); reden and sprechen can take both, and von here is a bit more literary / high style / old-fashioned for me than über. But there's also some subtle differences, e.g. in Du sprichst von Liebe. one possible implication is that the adressed person talked about himself or someone else loving someone, while in Du sprichst über Liebe. the implication is more that the adressed person speaks about love as a general topic. Do you have a concrete example in mind?

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

hwhatting wrote:
linguoboy wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:Small question: worueber vs wovon. Any difference?
Principally in collocation, but that's true of many prepositions, isn't it?
To expand that a bit, wovon is the interrogative / relative pronoun relating to phrases governed by von, while worüber is the interrogative / relative pronoun relating to phrases governed by über.
E.g.:
Wovon handelt das Buch? Es handelt von einem Mann, der seinen Schatten verkauft. "What's the book about? It's about a man who sells his shadow."
Worüber redet er gerade? Er redet über den Weltfrieden. "What's he talking about? He's talking about world peace."
So the real question is "what's the difference between using von or über in construction / situation X." They overlap when talking about content, like in the examples above, and sometimes their use is triggered by a certain word (e.g. IMD, handeln takes von, but there are people who say handeln über (to me that sounds colloquial / uneducated); reden and sprechen can take both, and von here is a bit more literary / high style / old-fashioned for me than über. But there's also some subtle differences, e.g. in Du sprichst von Liebe. one possible implication is that the adressed person talked about himself or someone else loving someone, while in Du sprichst über Liebe. the implication is more that the adressed person speaks about love as a general topic. Do you have a concrete example in mind?
Not really. Just came up on duolingo, which obviously doesn't say why one is wrong and the other right. So I looked them up in a dictionary, and they both came up 'whereof'. And then I thought of the famous Wittgenstein 'Sentence 7': Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen, which uses -von and -ueber forms even in a situation where you'd expect parallelism to encourage the same word being used if it were possible.
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

hwhatting
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2315
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by hwhatting »

Salmoneus wrote:And then I thought of the famous Wittgenstein 'Sentence 7': Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen, which uses -von and -ueber forms even in a situation where you'd expect parallelism to encourage the same word being used if it were possible.
I knew that this quote would show up. :-) And it shows you how interchangeable von and über are in these contexts.

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

hwhatting wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:And then I thought of the famous Wittgenstein 'Sentence 7': Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen, which uses -von and -ueber forms even in a situation where you'd expect parallelism to encourage the same word being used if it were possible.
I knew that this quote would show up. :-) And it shows you how interchangeable von and über are in these contexts.
Are they interchangeable there? so he could have said 'wovon muss man schweigen', or 'worueber man nicht sprechen kann'? I wonder why he didn't. An intentional anti-parallelism? The English translation always goes for parallelism (whereof/thereof), although given the somewhat stuffy language they could have mirrored a non-parallelism with, say, whereof/thereon, or perhaps 'of which'/'on this' or the like.

Anyway, thanks for clarifying.

[yeah, I don't know that many literary German sentences, I'm afraid. It's mostly a few sentences from Wittgenstein and a few bits from the Ode to Joy...]
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

hwhatting
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2315
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by hwhatting »

Salmoneus wrote:Are they interchangeable there? so he could have said 'wovon muss man schweigen', or 'worueber man nicht sprechen kann'?
davon muss man schweigen . Yes, that would have been correct.
I wonder why he didn't. An intentional anti-parallelism?
Possible. Perhaps personal preferences in preposition use. That could be clarified by a corpus search of his texts, if anyone is up to that.

Anders
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:02 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Anders »

What does von wegen das ist alter Schnee mean?

I have never seen von wegen used like this before and alter Schnee seems to be an idiomatic expression.

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by linguoboy »

Anders wrote:What does von wegen das ist alter Schnee mean?

I have never seen von wegen used like this before and alter Schnee seems to be an idiomatic expression.
I'm not sure what medium this appeared in, but could it be that the author left off the punctuation? "Von wegen" by itself is roughly equivalent to "as if!" And I haven't heard "alter Schnee" before, but "Schnee von gestern" is roughly "water under the bridge" or "yesterday's news". So I would guess something like, "As if! That's old news."

hwhatting
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2315
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by hwhatting »

linguoboy wrote:
Anders wrote:What does von wegen das ist alter Schnee mean?

I have never seen von wegen used like this before and alter Schnee seems to be an idiomatic expression.
I'm not sure what medium this appeared in, but could it be that the author left off the punctuation? "Von wegen" by itself is roughly equivalent to "as if!" And I haven't heard "alter Schnee" before, but "Schnee von gestern" is roughly "water under the bridge" or "yesterday's news". So I would guess something like, "As if! That's old news."
That's one interpretation, the other "that's not old news at all" (this would be spoken as one phrase, with a strong stress on wégen). A bit more context would be helpful to clarify the ambiguity.

Anders
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:02 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Anders »

hwhatting wrote:
linguoboy wrote:
Anders wrote:What does von wegen das ist alter Schnee mean?

I have never seen von wegen used like this before and alter Schnee seems to be an idiomatic expression.
I'm not sure what medium this appeared in, but could it be that the author left off the punctuation? "Von wegen" by itself is roughly equivalent to "as if!" And I haven't heard "alter Schnee" before, but "Schnee von gestern" is roughly "water under the bridge" or "yesterday's news". So I would guess something like, "As if! That's old news."
That's one interpretation, the other "that's not old news at all" (this would be spoken as one phrase, with a strong stress on wégen). A bit more context would be helpful to clarify the ambiguity.
Thanks guys. I got what I needed.

awer
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 4:03 pm
Location: poland

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by awer »

I was just surprised once again reading:
"Harry, den Lord Voldemort bereits mehrmals zu töten versucht hat, ..."
instead of "...merhmals versucht hat zu töten"?
is this how it always works in subordinate clauses? or is it because the object of "töten" (Harry) is extracted from the clause? thanks in advance.

Cedh
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Cedh »

Both of those variants are grammatical and natural, so it's mainly a matter of style. The first option "den V. bereits mehrmals zu töten versucht hat" sounds a bit more formal and would be preferred in writing, while the second option "den V. bereits mehrmals versucht hat zu töten" sounds more colloquial and would be more likely to be found in oral conversation.

User avatar
Imralu
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Questions about German Thread

Post by Imralu »

It's just occurred to me that I don't know how to distinguish between a (web)site and a (web)page in German. It seems like some people use Homepage to mean website and Webseite to mean website or webpage.

____________________________

Also, when talking about grammar, does anyone know a succinct distinction between

Argument ↔ Ergänzung
Adjunkt ↔ Angabe

They all have separate Wikipedia articles and my head starts to swim in reading them. All I can gather is the two on the left are used by all linguists (corresponding to their cognates in English) and the two on the left are traditionally German words and the concepts differ slightly, although how they differ is not something I can find explained anywhere. The top two are required by the verb and the bottom two are optional.

I was basically looking for one word that would cover both argument and adjunct (in English as well as German), whether required or optional, as this seems like a normal thing to me, basically anything other than the predicate verb phrase, and instead, I found four words that seem to be subtly distinguished.
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific
________
MY MUSIC

Post Reply