>>and Dutch "daarvoor"<<
"therefore" is archaic in English? No way travis.
"therefore" is archaic in English? No way travis.
English, German, & Dutch
Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia in Dutch about the German language:
"Het Duits (Hoogduits) is een taal behorende tot de West-Germaanse tak van de Germaanse talen. Het is de officiële taal van Duitsland, Oostenrijk en Liechtenstein, en een van de officiële talen van Zwitserland, Luxemburg, België (Oostkantons) en Italië (Zuid-Tirol). In onder meer Namibië (een vroegere Duitse kolonie) en landen van het voormalige Oostblok wordt het ook gesproken, maar zonder officiële erkenning."
First off, it looks like an excerpt of English at first glance, not German.
Secondly,
<Het Duits (Hoogduits) is een taal behorende tot de West-Germaanse tak van de Germaanse talen. Het is de officiële taal van Duitsland, Oostenrijk en Liechtenstein, en een van de officiële talen van Zwitserland, Luxemburg, België (Oostkantons) en Italië (Zuid-Tirol).>
directly translates into English as
<[The] German is a language belonging to the West-Germanic branch of the Germanic languages. It is the official language of Germany, Austria and Liechtenstein, and one of the official languages of Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium and Italy.>
sentence structure is exactly the same word for word.
The same passage in German is:
<Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen gehört [<ODER>--"Die deutsche Sprache gehört zum westlichen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen"]. Es ist die offizielle Sprache Deutschlands, Österreichs und Liechtensteins, und einer der offiziellen Sprachen der Schweiz, Luxemburgs, Belgiens und Italiens>
This doesn't look or feel at all like Dutch/English which have a similar intuitive flow. German is alien to a native English AND Dutch speaker, regardless of lexical similarities previously cited.
"Het Duits (Hoogduits) is een taal behorende tot de West-Germaanse tak van de Germaanse talen. Het is de officiële taal van Duitsland, Oostenrijk en Liechtenstein, en een van de officiële talen van Zwitserland, Luxemburg, België (Oostkantons) en Italië (Zuid-Tirol). In onder meer Namibië (een vroegere Duitse kolonie) en landen van het voormalige Oostblok wordt het ook gesproken, maar zonder officiële erkenning."
First off, it looks like an excerpt of English at first glance, not German.
Secondly,
<Het Duits (Hoogduits) is een taal behorende tot de West-Germaanse tak van de Germaanse talen. Het is de officiële taal van Duitsland, Oostenrijk en Liechtenstein, en een van de officiële talen van Zwitserland, Luxemburg, België (Oostkantons) en Italië (Zuid-Tirol).>
directly translates into English as
<[The] German is a language belonging to the West-Germanic branch of the Germanic languages. It is the official language of Germany, Austria and Liechtenstein, and one of the official languages of Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium and Italy.>
sentence structure is exactly the same word for word.
The same passage in German is:
<Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen gehört [<ODER>--"Die deutsche Sprache gehört zum westlichen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen"]. Es ist die offizielle Sprache Deutschlands, Österreichs und Liechtensteins, und einer der offiziellen Sprachen der Schweiz, Luxemburgs, Belgiens und Italiens>
This doesn't look or feel at all like Dutch/English which have a similar intuitive flow. German is alien to a native English AND Dutch speaker, regardless of lexical similarities previously cited.
>>>>and Dutch "daarvoor"<<
"therefore" is archaic in English? No way travis.<<
"Therefore" itself is not archaic at all unlike many other such forms in English, but such compounds are for the most part no longer productive in English overall, and it seems to be a rare example of such a form in English which is still used in a truly productive outsided fixed expressions (as, say, "thereof" is normally heard).
But anyways, with respect to "daarvoor", I just was giving examples of such forms in English, German, and Dutch; it just happens that Dutch "daarvoor" has a direct cognate in English that is remarkably not archaic or at least only used in frozen expressions in everyday speech.
"therefore" is archaic in English? No way travis.<<
"Therefore" itself is not archaic at all unlike many other such forms in English, but such compounds are for the most part no longer productive in English overall, and it seems to be a rare example of such a form in English which is still used in a truly productive outsided fixed expressions (as, say, "thereof" is normally heard).
But anyways, with respect to "daarvoor", I just was giving examples of such forms in English, German, and Dutch; it just happens that Dutch "daarvoor" has a direct cognate in English that is remarkably not archaic or at least only used in frozen expressions in everyday speech.
>>This doesn't look or feel at all like Dutch/English which have a similar intuitive flow. German is alien to a native English AND Dutch speaker, regardless of lexical similarities previously cited.<<
I will give you that one can have examples of German where the equivalent Dutch has a closer overall sentence structure to the equivalent English, yes. However, though, in this example the main thing that really sets the German apart from the Dutch and English is the way relative clauses are used in German where gerund or present participle forms with their own subjects and objects are commonly used in Dutch and English, and the use of the genitive in the German where Dutch and English would tend to use forms with prepositions.
But even with the genitive versus prepositions such as "of" and "van", the matter is that such is really only pertinent to formal German versus Dutch and formal English; formal German still uses the genitive a lot where normal spoken German has all but lost it, whereas Dutch has completely lost the genitive outside fixed forms such as "vader des vaderlands" in all registers, and weirdly enough colloquial English seems to use its equivalent of the German genitive case much more widely than formal English does (opposite to the pattern with German)...
I will give you that one can have examples of German where the equivalent Dutch has a closer overall sentence structure to the equivalent English, yes. However, though, in this example the main thing that really sets the German apart from the Dutch and English is the way relative clauses are used in German where gerund or present participle forms with their own subjects and objects are commonly used in Dutch and English, and the use of the genitive in the German where Dutch and English would tend to use forms with prepositions.
But even with the genitive versus prepositions such as "of" and "van", the matter is that such is really only pertinent to formal German versus Dutch and formal English; formal German still uses the genitive a lot where normal spoken German has all but lost it, whereas Dutch has completely lost the genitive outside fixed forms such as "vader des vaderlands" in all registers, and weirdly enough colloquial English seems to use its equivalent of the German genitive case much more widely than formal English does (opposite to the pattern with German)...
@Buddy
English is nothing like Dutch, and it doesn't look like it at all! You must be blind on one eye. German has just lots of capital letters which makes it "look" a little bit different compared to other languages.
English is nothing like Dutch, and it doesn't look like it at all! You must be blind on one eye. German has just lots of capital letters which makes it "look" a little bit different compared to other languages.
The same passage in German is:
<Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen gehört [<ODER>--"Die deutsche Sprache gehört zum westlichen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen"]. ...>
Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen angehört.
<Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen gehört [<ODER>--"Die deutsche Sprache gehört zum westlichen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen"]. ...>
Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen angehört.
"sentence structure is exactly the same word for word."
You chose a sentence structure where German is still more conservative than both English and Dutch, but this does not change the fact that overall Dutch resembles German more than English, be it sentence structure or vocabulary. Let's face it :)
You chose a sentence structure where German is still more conservative than both English and Dutch, but this does not change the fact that overall Dutch resembles German more than English, be it sentence structure or vocabulary. Let's face it :)
<<English is nothing like Dutch, and it doesn't look like it at all! You must be blind on one eye. German has just lots of capital letters which makes it "look" a little bit different compared to other languages. >>
Dutchie, u bent geen Nederlander!
<Engels is niet zo Nederlands, en het ziet er niet uit als het helemaal! U moet blind aan een oog. Duits zojuist heeft veel hoofdletters, waardoor het "ziet" een beetje anders uit in vergelijking met andere talen>
Auf Deutsch (mit Großbuchstaben wie auf Englisch und Niederländisch):
<Englisch ist nichts wie niederländisch, und es sieht wie es überhaupt nicht aus! Sie müssen halbblind sein. Deutsch hat gerade viele großbuchstaben, die es ein kleines bisschen verschieden verglichen mit anderen sprachen aussehen lassen.>
Nope--English and Dutch still look like siblings. German looks like a first or second cousin...
Alien..., und völlig fremd!
Dutchie, u bent geen Nederlander!
<Engels is niet zo Nederlands, en het ziet er niet uit als het helemaal! U moet blind aan een oog. Duits zojuist heeft veel hoofdletters, waardoor het "ziet" een beetje anders uit in vergelijking met andere talen>
Auf Deutsch (mit Großbuchstaben wie auf Englisch und Niederländisch):
<Englisch ist nichts wie niederländisch, und es sieht wie es überhaupt nicht aus! Sie müssen halbblind sein. Deutsch hat gerade viele großbuchstaben, die es ein kleines bisschen verschieden verglichen mit anderen sprachen aussehen lassen.>
Nope--English and Dutch still look like siblings. German looks like a first or second cousin...
Alien..., und völlig fremd!
"Englisch ist nichts wie niederländisch, und es sieht wie es überhaupt nicht aus! Sie müssen halbblind sein. Deutsch hat gerade viele großbuchstaben, die es ein kleines bisschen verschieden verglichen mit anderen sprachen aussehen lassen."
This is no proper German, you fool.
This is no proper German, you fool.
<<This is no proper German, you fool. >>
And this ^ is improper English, Genius.
Question:
Why when a post is made in "not so perfect" German does it always elicit such a negative response from this Idiot? WHO CARES IF IT'S NOT PROPER. You understood it right? That's all that matters.
Like anyone cares whether the German language is spoken correctly to your stupid standards.
Why don't you do us all a big favor: Go through all the posts in both forums and comment on the improper English, Spanish and French remarks as well? Hmmm?
And learn some basic manners while you're at it
And this ^ is improper English, Genius.
Question:
Why when a post is made in "not so perfect" German does it always elicit such a negative response from this Idiot? WHO CARES IF IT'S NOT PROPER. You understood it right? That's all that matters.
Like anyone cares whether the German language is spoken correctly to your stupid standards.
Why don't you do us all a big favor: Go through all the posts in both forums and comment on the improper English, Spanish and French remarks as well? Hmmm?
And learn some basic manners while you're at it
"WHO CARES IF IT'S NOT PROPER. You understood it right? That's all that matters."
Wrong. If one draws featureless head-to-head comparisons between languages like you did it IS something to care. Then it has to be proper! This has nothing to do with simple remarks in whatever language.
btw, I was not that "guest" above, so don't draw hasty conclusions.
"...learn some basic manners..." that's rich, coming from you:)
Wrong. If one draws featureless head-to-head comparisons between languages like you did it IS something to care. Then it has to be proper! This has nothing to do with simple remarks in whatever language.
btw, I was not that "guest" above, so don't draw hasty conclusions.
"...learn some basic manners..." that's rich, coming from you:)
<<Wrong. If one draws featureless head-to-head comparisons between languages like you did it IS something to care. Then it has to be proper! This has nothing to do with simple remarks in whatever language.
btw, I was not that "guest" above, so don't draw hasty conclusions.
>>
This isn't proper English. Here let me assist you....
Wrong. If one draws featureless head-to-head comparisons between languages as you did, then it IS something to be cared about. In this case, it has to be proper!
No one else makes these types of nitpicky corrections (now granted, I'm not speaking about the post here {"Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen angehört. "}--this is valid. I'm talking about the one just above {This is no proper German, you fool. } and all the other ones stating "Du bist kein Deutschmutterspracher"--that Sh*t.
Ok, fine, I have a bad attitude sometimes, I know it--(and I kinda like it too hehe;) but I get you all discussing and I help mix things up where you would have an otherwise slow and boring go of things--remember that. btw, for all my hard efforts, YOU'RE WELCOME :|]
: )
btw, I was not that "guest" above, so don't draw hasty conclusions.
>>
This isn't proper English. Here let me assist you....
Wrong. If one draws featureless head-to-head comparisons between languages as you did, then it IS something to be cared about. In this case, it has to be proper!
No one else makes these types of nitpicky corrections (now granted, I'm not speaking about the post here {"Deutsch ist eine Sprache, die dem westgermanischen Zweig der germanischen Sprachen angehört. "}--this is valid. I'm talking about the one just above {This is no proper German, you fool. } and all the other ones stating "Du bist kein Deutschmutterspracher"--that Sh*t.
Ok, fine, I have a bad attitude sometimes, I know it--(and I kinda like it too hehe;) but I get you all discussing and I help mix things up where you would have an otherwise slow and boring go of things--remember that. btw, for all my hard efforts, YOU'RE WELCOME :|]
: )
>>English is nothing like Dutch, and it doesn't look like it at all! You must be blind on one eye. German has just lots of capital letters which makes it "look" a little bit different compared to other languages<<
Englisch ist gar nicht wie Niederländisch, und sieht dieser Sprache überhaupt nicht ähnlich aus. Du bist wohl halb blind, oder? Das Deutsche hat einfach viele Grossbuchstaben, was zur Folge hat, dass es im Vergleich zu anderen Sprachen ein bisschen anders aussieht.
Besser?
Englisch ist gar nicht wie Niederländisch, und sieht dieser Sprache überhaupt nicht ähnlich aus. Du bist wohl halb blind, oder? Das Deutsche hat einfach viele Grossbuchstaben, was zur Folge hat, dass es im Vergleich zu anderen Sprachen ein bisschen anders aussieht.
Besser?
Englisch ist gar nicht wie Niederländisch, und sieht dieser Sprache überhaupt nicht ähnlich. Du bist wohl halbblind, oder? Das Deutsche hat einfach viele Großbuchstaben, was zur Folge hat, daß es im Vergleich zu anderen Sprachen ein bißchen anders aussieht.
I would have given a correction of the first translation of the cited sentence above, but, as I didn't read this thread up to the point of that message then,
I thought that you probably wanted to show something with that odd translation. I was in a hurry, too.
Consider the many capital letters as help for the reader to easily and instantly grasp the principal notions of a sentence.
Note that the reformed spelling ''bisschen'' for classical ''bißchen'' is more likely be read bis-schen [sch = sh as in ''ship''] then the correct biß-chen [ch as h in ''humen'' in some english dialects]. In classical orthography, the ß is intended to mark syllable boundries. This -- and many other issuses -- proof Classical German orthography to be much better (especially for non-native learners) than the reformed rubbish.
I would have given a correction of the first translation of the cited sentence above, but, as I didn't read this thread up to the point of that message then,
I thought that you probably wanted to show something with that odd translation. I was in a hurry, too.
Consider the many capital letters as help for the reader to easily and instantly grasp the principal notions of a sentence.
Note that the reformed spelling ''bisschen'' for classical ''bißchen'' is more likely be read bis-schen [sch = sh as in ''ship''] then the correct biß-chen [ch as h in ''humen'' in some english dialects]. In classical orthography, the ß is intended to mark syllable boundries. This -- and many other issuses -- proof Classical German orthography to be much better (especially for non-native learners) than the reformed rubbish.
Note that the reformed spelling ''bisschen'' for classical ''bißchen'' is more likely to be read bis-schen [with sch = sh as in ''ship''] then the correct biß-chen [with ch as h in ''humen'' in some english dialects].