![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
There is a claim in section "Grammar" - subsection "Noun inflection" which states "Both of these cases are losing ground to substitutes in informal speech." referring to dative and genitive. This claim is neither proven nor can it be substantiated. It is pretty much an urban legend, which is almost always told when dative and genitive is mentioned. There is no reliable evidence, such as scientific studies that proof such language changes. For such claims reliable evidence which meet scientific standards must be used to state a language change. This is also important taking into account that language learners use WP as a source, and reading this claim may lead to the misconception that dative and genitive is not that important to learn, which would be a huge mistake. - 92.209.109.221 ( talk) 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
I was on a random page - Colmar Pocket. Anyway when I hovered over the link to German it showed a preview that seems possibly a bit inappropriate.
It says "Example of Language: Güchendörf which means "You're Hot" in the English language.
I have no idea how to edit this preview. Over to you guys?
Or let me know if you need a screenshot
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxfornow ( talk • contribs) 11:48, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
E-960 ( talk · contribs) is vandalising articles on German language by removing a map which is referenced by peer-reviewed author Ammon, obviously for ideological reasons - "German minorities must not exist, for the have been justfully erased". -- PhJ ( talk) 09:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
See also commons:File talk:German standard varieties.png. E-960, your edits to the file on Commons were all reverted, mainly because they blanked out certain regions in stead of correcting when necessary (and when making corrections, those corrections should – of course – be accompanied by references). Basically the same as was done here: "I think it's wrong so I remove it". You shouldn't. You should correct it. As for the map itself: I think it might not be 'wrong' per se, but outdated in some aspects. So yes, some minorities might be significantly smaller now than the map suggests. I don't beleave that is for the sake of 'deliberate manipulation of facts'. Richard 11:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Richard, per WikiCommons rules, the changes should occur on the article page not on the map itself, if the map is questionable it should be discussed and removed form the article, not changing the map on WikiCommons (my initial mistake), pls review the rules instead of trying to punt the ball back to WikiCommons. Provided the links to the actual articles on the subject, they have tables etc. backed up by the census date for easy reference. -- E-960 ( talk) 12:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
I scanned my copy of Ammon et al. (2004) for maps; this is the complete list:
There is no map showing German speaker distribution outside the seven nationale Vollzentren and nationale Halbzentren.
As a linguist I don't care how many speakers a language variety has. This figure has no impact on its scientific value, and the most influential language in current linguistic theory discourse is Pirahã. Over half of living languages have considerably less than 10,000 speakers anyway (see Ethnologue statistics), and several hundred is already a fair and "sizeable" number. (E-960's spelling is sizable.) I myself contributed to the primary description of a language of Northern Sulawesi with a similar number of speakers as Pirahã. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 20:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
There are 200.000 German speaking people in Poland, but now have a look on E-960s maps...: The Polish Map is empty...: If you want to learn about German speaking people in Poland, then you better refer to the section § Geographic distribution. There, you will find the map Legal statuses of German in Europe (which appears to be based on much more reliable sources than the dubious map E-960 has removed). Voilà: the Polish map is not empty.
Due to complications arising from multi-ethnic identities and previous concealment during the communist period, many people of German descent are not accounted for and some estimates number Poles of German ancestry from 400,000 to 500,000. [2]In other words, people felt it was safer to conceal their ethnic identity, and they continue to conceal it. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 14:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I've just realized this summer, that user E-960 is trying to manipulate maps about the German language, because he tried to change some files, which I had on my watchlist, so they showed up. But now that I looked on this article, I just found out, that he even changed other maps (which are used on this page) long time before, like in 2017. He always erases all German speaking minorities in Poland, Czechia and Slovakia completely. This is an act of denying of the existence of German speaking minorities in Eastern Central Europe. So he already changed this map ( File:Continental West Germanic languages.png) in 2017.. Just have a look on the version history and compare. On this map he even erased everything in Hungary and Romania. So now I hope, that you know how biased his edits are. -- Jonny84 ( talk) 13:46, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Low German is an language, not an dialect. Please note that. [5] -- Phillipm0703 ( talk) 09:41, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I would argue that the dialects or regional languages (depending on whose side of that debate you are on) should be placed in the infobox by the parameter dia1=, dia2= instead of listing 20 different ISO 639-3 codes, 20 different Glottolog codes and Linguasphere codes. Each of those languages/regional languages/languoid, dialects have an infobox where the various codes can and should be added.-- Alternative Transport ( talk) 08:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
The correct order of the four cases is:
nominative, genitive, dative, accusative
Example: das Haus - the house
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CA:9702:A100:49B8:44AE:EF60:2012 ( talk) 12:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I've tagged some of the words (anschluss, kraut, reich, gelandesprung) listed in the loanword section as I don't think the fit the bill. If a loanword here is a word from German that has come into general use in English, then these aren't, really; English speakers do not use anschluss when they mean connection, or kraut when they mean cabbage, or reich when they mean empire. All of those words are, rather, borrowed terms ie non-English (in this case German) words with a specific meaning that are used because there isn't an English word for it. And there is nothing at the Ski-jumping article to suggest that gelandesprung is commonly used in English to describe it. Is this list drawn from any source at all? Or is it just a list someone has dreamed up? Moonraker12 ( talk) 01:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if it was of any interest to have the table in section English to German cognates supported by an audio recording?
If so,
(Alternative: To mind, adding IPA to the column would just blow up the article/the table unnecessarily, wouldn't it?) DrJHinker ( talk) 11:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I feel the table is getting too bulky. Besides, not all of the items seem to be exact cognates. For example, fließen parallels to fleet rather than to flow. Flow is cognate to Old High German flewen, flawen "to rinse", Proto-Germanic *flōaną; while fließen derives from OHG vliozan, P-G *fleutaną. That is, they have been different words for millennia. Similarly, Fluss is closer to flood than to flow; Hut closer to hood than to hat; and it is by no means certain that hag is shortened from Old English hægtesse, hæhtisse, hægtes, -tis, hegtes "fury, witch, hag" ≘ OHG hagazissa, hagazussa, hagzus, whence Hexe. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 12:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
This was unnecessary and is now confusing. "2." is clearly the German ordinal meaning "2nd". Jmar67 ( talk) 00:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
German, standard. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#German, standard until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
German, Standard. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#German, Standard until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Deutsh. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 2#Deutsh until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I think that this could fit well in the "History" section to show the dialects of German (and Dutch) in the early 1900s: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Karte_der_deutschen_Mundarten_(Brockhaus).jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.252.66 ( talk) 01:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Many of the words listed as English Loanwords are obviously no such thing e.g. anschluss, gedankenexperiment, gelandesprung, gemütlichkeit, reich, sprachraum, verklemmt.
The fact that these words may be understood by some English speakers due to cultural significance etc. does not make them English Loanwords. The list neds to be pruned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.207.121 ( talk) 23:30, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
The article barely mentions the problem. It needs at least few lines. Xx236 ( talk) 06:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Recently added table lacks three references. Xx236 ( talk) 09:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Can that table be moved... anywhere else? The lead shouldn't contain tables at all.-- Megaman en m ( talk) 12:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Please add to external links
German language is part of a concept, the concept of two sides of a language, the dialect continuum on the one side and the umbrella variant on the other, forming together a language, this is how Low German as part of the West Germanic continuum and Standard German as the umbrella can be part of the same language... not everybody believes in this concept, but many do, cf. e.g. Peter von Matt "Unsere Muttersprache ist Deutsch in zwei Gestalten"... others may define a language with different criteria like grammatical distance, different set of sound changes and other contact languages... -- Aferghes ( talk) 02:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
So to sum it up: Information and source are insufficient. -- Naramaru ( talk) 14:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Thus:
-- Naramaru ( talk) 12:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Fantinij,
Sarahaubrey13. Peer reviewers:
Esotericbubbba,
Djiang1019.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Would someone have a quick look at Umlaut (linguistics)#Marking please? As written, it appears to suggest that the mark is historic. I don't speak German but even I know this to be nonsense. Thank you. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 11:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
The redirect
Wie gehts has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 22 § Wie gehts until a consensus is reached.
1234qwer
1234qwer
4
18:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Deutschgesprachen has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 22 § Deutschgesprachen until a consensus is reached.
1234qwer
1234qwer
4
18:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
There is a claim in section "Grammar" - subsection "Noun inflection" which states "Both of these cases are losing ground to substitutes in informal speech." referring to dative and genitive. This claim is neither proven nor can it be substantiated. It is pretty much an urban legend, which is almost always told when dative and genitive is mentioned. There is no reliable evidence, such as scientific studies that proof such language changes. For such claims reliable evidence which meet scientific standards must be used to state a language change. This is also important taking into account that language learners use WP as a source, and reading this claim may lead to the misconception that dative and genitive is not that important to learn, which would be a huge mistake. - 92.209.109.221 ( talk) 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
I was on a random page - Colmar Pocket. Anyway when I hovered over the link to German it showed a preview that seems possibly a bit inappropriate.
It says "Example of Language: Güchendörf which means "You're Hot" in the English language.
I have no idea how to edit this preview. Over to you guys?
Or let me know if you need a screenshot
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxfornow ( talk • contribs) 11:48, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
E-960 ( talk · contribs) is vandalising articles on German language by removing a map which is referenced by peer-reviewed author Ammon, obviously for ideological reasons - "German minorities must not exist, for the have been justfully erased". -- PhJ ( talk) 09:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
See also commons:File talk:German standard varieties.png. E-960, your edits to the file on Commons were all reverted, mainly because they blanked out certain regions in stead of correcting when necessary (and when making corrections, those corrections should – of course – be accompanied by references). Basically the same as was done here: "I think it's wrong so I remove it". You shouldn't. You should correct it. As for the map itself: I think it might not be 'wrong' per se, but outdated in some aspects. So yes, some minorities might be significantly smaller now than the map suggests. I don't beleave that is for the sake of 'deliberate manipulation of facts'. Richard 11:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Richard, per WikiCommons rules, the changes should occur on the article page not on the map itself, if the map is questionable it should be discussed and removed form the article, not changing the map on WikiCommons (my initial mistake), pls review the rules instead of trying to punt the ball back to WikiCommons. Provided the links to the actual articles on the subject, they have tables etc. backed up by the census date for easy reference. -- E-960 ( talk) 12:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
I scanned my copy of Ammon et al. (2004) for maps; this is the complete list:
There is no map showing German speaker distribution outside the seven nationale Vollzentren and nationale Halbzentren.
As a linguist I don't care how many speakers a language variety has. This figure has no impact on its scientific value, and the most influential language in current linguistic theory discourse is Pirahã. Over half of living languages have considerably less than 10,000 speakers anyway (see Ethnologue statistics), and several hundred is already a fair and "sizeable" number. (E-960's spelling is sizable.) I myself contributed to the primary description of a language of Northern Sulawesi with a similar number of speakers as Pirahã. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 20:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
There are 200.000 German speaking people in Poland, but now have a look on E-960s maps...: The Polish Map is empty...: If you want to learn about German speaking people in Poland, then you better refer to the section § Geographic distribution. There, you will find the map Legal statuses of German in Europe (which appears to be based on much more reliable sources than the dubious map E-960 has removed). Voilà: the Polish map is not empty.
Due to complications arising from multi-ethnic identities and previous concealment during the communist period, many people of German descent are not accounted for and some estimates number Poles of German ancestry from 400,000 to 500,000. [2]In other words, people felt it was safer to conceal their ethnic identity, and they continue to conceal it. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 14:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I've just realized this summer, that user E-960 is trying to manipulate maps about the German language, because he tried to change some files, which I had on my watchlist, so they showed up. But now that I looked on this article, I just found out, that he even changed other maps (which are used on this page) long time before, like in 2017. He always erases all German speaking minorities in Poland, Czechia and Slovakia completely. This is an act of denying of the existence of German speaking minorities in Eastern Central Europe. So he already changed this map ( File:Continental West Germanic languages.png) in 2017.. Just have a look on the version history and compare. On this map he even erased everything in Hungary and Romania. So now I hope, that you know how biased his edits are. -- Jonny84 ( talk) 13:46, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Low German is an language, not an dialect. Please note that. [5] -- Phillipm0703 ( talk) 09:41, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I would argue that the dialects or regional languages (depending on whose side of that debate you are on) should be placed in the infobox by the parameter dia1=, dia2= instead of listing 20 different ISO 639-3 codes, 20 different Glottolog codes and Linguasphere codes. Each of those languages/regional languages/languoid, dialects have an infobox where the various codes can and should be added.-- Alternative Transport ( talk) 08:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
The correct order of the four cases is:
nominative, genitive, dative, accusative
Example: das Haus - the house
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CA:9702:A100:49B8:44AE:EF60:2012 ( talk) 12:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I've tagged some of the words (anschluss, kraut, reich, gelandesprung) listed in the loanword section as I don't think the fit the bill. If a loanword here is a word from German that has come into general use in English, then these aren't, really; English speakers do not use anschluss when they mean connection, or kraut when they mean cabbage, or reich when they mean empire. All of those words are, rather, borrowed terms ie non-English (in this case German) words with a specific meaning that are used because there isn't an English word for it. And there is nothing at the Ski-jumping article to suggest that gelandesprung is commonly used in English to describe it. Is this list drawn from any source at all? Or is it just a list someone has dreamed up? Moonraker12 ( talk) 01:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if it was of any interest to have the table in section English to German cognates supported by an audio recording?
If so,
(Alternative: To mind, adding IPA to the column would just blow up the article/the table unnecessarily, wouldn't it?) DrJHinker ( talk) 11:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I feel the table is getting too bulky. Besides, not all of the items seem to be exact cognates. For example, fließen parallels to fleet rather than to flow. Flow is cognate to Old High German flewen, flawen "to rinse", Proto-Germanic *flōaną; while fließen derives from OHG vliozan, P-G *fleutaną. That is, they have been different words for millennia. Similarly, Fluss is closer to flood than to flow; Hut closer to hood than to hat; and it is by no means certain that hag is shortened from Old English hægtesse, hæhtisse, hægtes, -tis, hegtes "fury, witch, hag" ≘ OHG hagazissa, hagazussa, hagzus, whence Hexe. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 12:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
This was unnecessary and is now confusing. "2." is clearly the German ordinal meaning "2nd". Jmar67 ( talk) 00:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
German, standard. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#German, standard until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
German, Standard. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#German, Standard until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Deutsh. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 2#Deutsh until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
12:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I think that this could fit well in the "History" section to show the dialects of German (and Dutch) in the early 1900s: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Karte_der_deutschen_Mundarten_(Brockhaus).jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.252.66 ( talk) 01:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Many of the words listed as English Loanwords are obviously no such thing e.g. anschluss, gedankenexperiment, gelandesprung, gemütlichkeit, reich, sprachraum, verklemmt.
The fact that these words may be understood by some English speakers due to cultural significance etc. does not make them English Loanwords. The list neds to be pruned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.207.121 ( talk) 23:30, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
The article barely mentions the problem. It needs at least few lines. Xx236 ( talk) 06:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Recently added table lacks three references. Xx236 ( talk) 09:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Can that table be moved... anywhere else? The lead shouldn't contain tables at all.-- Megaman en m ( talk) 12:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Please add to external links
German language is part of a concept, the concept of two sides of a language, the dialect continuum on the one side and the umbrella variant on the other, forming together a language, this is how Low German as part of the West Germanic continuum and Standard German as the umbrella can be part of the same language... not everybody believes in this concept, but many do, cf. e.g. Peter von Matt "Unsere Muttersprache ist Deutsch in zwei Gestalten"... others may define a language with different criteria like grammatical distance, different set of sound changes and other contact languages... -- Aferghes ( talk) 02:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
So to sum it up: Information and source are insufficient. -- Naramaru ( talk) 14:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Thus:
-- Naramaru ( talk) 12:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Fantinij,
Sarahaubrey13. Peer reviewers:
Esotericbubbba,
Djiang1019.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Would someone have a quick look at Umlaut (linguistics)#Marking please? As written, it appears to suggest that the mark is historic. I don't speak German but even I know this to be nonsense. Thank you. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 11:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
The redirect
Wie gehts has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 22 § Wie gehts until a consensus is reached.
1234qwer
1234qwer
4
18:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Deutschgesprachen has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 22 § Deutschgesprachen until a consensus is reached.
1234qwer
1234qwer
4
18:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)