Searching \ for '[OT] a definite blood.boiler Wheeeeee !' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=definite+bloodboiler
Search entire site for: 'a definite blood.boiler Wheeeeee !'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] a definite blood.boiler Wheeeeee !'
2006\07\31@145151 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
On 7/31/06, Gerhard Fiedler <spam_OUTlistsTakeThisOuTspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> (This notwithstanding the Southern US idiom "y'all" -- which
> seems to be rarely used here and I'm not sure would be generally called
> "English" anyway :)

Technically "y'all" is not plural either.  "all y'all" is the plural.
"y'all" sits in a very odd position, and is somewhat like "we" in that
way.

And it's used quite often in various regions, but the closer you get
to any city, even in the south, the less you'll hear it.

-Adam

2006\07\31@151058 by D. Jay Newman

flavicon
face
> On 7/31/06, Gerhard Fiedler <.....listsKILLspamspam@spam@connectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> > (This notwithstanding the Southern US idiom "y'all" -- which
> > seems to be rarely used here and I'm not sure would be generally called
> > "English" anyway :)
>
> Technically "y'all" is not plural either.  "all y'all" is the plural.
> "y'all" sits in a very odd position, and is somewhat like "we" in that
> way.

"Y'all" is very much like the German word "sie" (2nd person plural) and
"Sie" (2nd person singular polite).
--
D. Jay Newman           ! Author of:
jayspamKILLspamsprucegrove.com     ! _Linux Robotics: Programming Smarter Robots_
http://enerd.ws/robots/ ! "Heros aren't born, they're cornered."

2006\07\31@160303 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
D. Jay Newman wrote:

>>> (This notwithstanding the Southern US idiom "y'all" -- which seems to
>>> be rarely used here and I'm not sure would be generally called
>>> "English" anyway :)
>>
>> Technically "y'all" is not plural either.  "all y'all" is the plural.
>> "y'all" sits in a very odd position, and is somewhat like "we" in that
>> way.
>
> "Y'all" is very much like the German word "sie" (2nd person plural) and
> "Sie" (2nd person singular polite).

I'm not really that good in grammar (especially German grammar -- who
learns grammar in his native language? :) but I think the "sie" you are
referring to is 3rd person plural. The "Sie" is in fact a functional 2nd
person singular polite that gets treated, grammar-wise, as a 3rd person
plural.

Very odd indeed, once you start listening to it with a "grammar ear". I
never liked it. Whenever reasonably possible, I use the more informal "du"
(2nd person singular for normal people :)

Gerhard

2006\07\31@170716 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 17:02 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Very odd indeed, once you start listening to it with a "grammar ear". I
> never liked it. Whenever reasonably possible, I use the more informal "du"
> (2nd person singular for normal people :)

Hehe, well, I'm an english as a first language person, and my limited
knowledge of German is basically from hearing my parents talk as I grew
up.

I do find your comment interesting though. I've never liked using "sie",
it just "sounds" a little off to me. But I've been told that you should
NEVER use "du", except for family and close friends. What's you're
opinion on using "du"? Would addressing a waiter with "du" be a huge
taboo to you?

As a concept this sort of thing is difficult for me. English is very
"neutral" in many ways. You address everybody as "you". A window isn't
female, a house isn't male, everything is neuter. Learning french in
school was always very difficult for me since there were so many things
like this which didn't seem to have any reason for being. Whether a noun
was female or male seemed to be decided based on the flip of a hat
(although an 'e' at the end often meant female, this wasn't a hard rule
that could be relied on). German adds to my confusion by adding "neuter"
to the mix.

Thanks, TTYL

2006\07\31@184239 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 17:02 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
>> Very odd indeed, once you start listening to it with a "grammar ear". I
>> never liked it. Whenever reasonably possible, I use the more informal "du"
>> (2nd person singular for normal people :)

> I do find your comment interesting though. I've never liked using "sie",
> it just "sounds" a little off to me.

I know what you are talking about. There are many constructs in languages
that sound normal to the native user because they're so used to them, but
to someone learning the language they sound odd, because they are
grammatically or otherwise odd constructs. Such a construct is this German
"Sie". It gets even odder when you consider that you also can use "Sie" to
address (formally) a group of people. In this case it is functionally 2nd
person plural, and still gets treated grammar-wise as 3rd person plural,
just like the 2nd person singular formal.

A bit like the old servant address "he can retire now" -- just formulated
as "they can retire now"... kind of a mixture between the 3rd person
servants used to be addressed in English (IIRC... it's been a long time)
with the pluralis majestatis.

> But I've been told that you should NEVER use "du", except for family and
> close friends. What's you're opinion on using "du"? Would addressing a
> waiter with "du" be a huge taboo to you?

I'd say if you are not able to "read" subtle and largely region-dependent
and group-dependent signs, you're definitely safer with "Sie" until you
hear what others do. Then you follow.

For example in rural Bavaria and in bars with a young or otherwise informal
crowd, the "du" is quite common. ("Mare, bring ma no a Bier!") However, the
formality of rural areas is changing and customs of city (and more formal)
people are penetrating.

I once worked for a client in the US, owned by a German. When I talked to
the German boss in English, I of course used the common "you" and his first
name, like everywhere else. And for all I could tell, he did enjoy this
informality. In Germany, at least in the circles I frequent, first name and
"du" is synonymous: as long as you're using "Sie", you're using the last
name (as in "Herr Somesuch"). But this guy didn't feel comfortable to be
addressed in German with "du", even though I continued to use his first
name in German, so I used the first name together with "Sie" in German.
Quite unusual for me. So you always have to feel it out; there's no clear
rule. (He was not from Bavaria :)

> As a concept this sort of thing is difficult for me. English is very
> "neutral" in many ways. You address everybody as "you".

Maybe compare it to using first name or "Mr./Ms. last name". This is also
not always an easy decision, and it appears to me to be similar to the "du"
and "Sie" in German. My impression is that at least in the USA the first
name is more common than the "du" in Germany, but in principle it is a
similar situation.

> A window isn't female, a house isn't male, everything is neuter.

Actually, in German both of these are neuter, too :)

> Learning french in school was always very difficult for me since there
> were so many things like this which didn't seem to have any reason for
> being.

I'm not sure how that is in German (you know, I just "know" it :), but
while English has some things going for it in terms of being easy to learn,
pronunciation is pure hell. As a non-native speaker, even after many many
years, I still don't know how to pronounce a new word that I've never heard
before. I don't have that problem in Portuguese. After a few weeks, I could
read (pronounce, not necessarily understand) pretty much any text. With a
thick accent, but otherwise correctly.

Gerhard

2006\07\31@210125 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 19:41 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> > Learning french in school was always very difficult for me since there
> > were so many things like this which didn't seem to have any reason for
> > being.
>
> I'm not sure how that is in German (you know, I just "know" it :), but
> while English has some things going for it in terms of being easy to learn,
> pronunciation is pure hell. As a non-native speaker, even after many many
> years, I still don't know how to pronounce a new word that I've never heard
> before. I don't have that problem in Portuguese. After a few weeks, I could
> read (pronounce, not necessarily understand) pretty much any text. With a
> thick accent, but otherwise correctly.

Oh, don't get me wrong, IMHO english IS a hell language to learn. It's
such a jumble of multiple roots, with all kinds of "exceptions" to the
rules. There are probably MORE exceptions then there are cases of the
rules being followed.

Pronunciation is certainly one of the dark areas of english. German OTOH
is quite easy for me. I can read out German in a way that is quite close
to the proper pronounciation (once you know how to pronounce the "double
dot" vowels, and the double s that looks like a B). Of course, the odd
thing is when I read something in German I have a BIG problem
understanding it. Yet, if someone reads me the same passage I almost
have no problem understanding it.

The other thing that always fascinated me about German is how almost
every younger German speaking person knows TWO versions of German. Once
is their local dialect (where milch sounds like muech, in the case of
Sterya where my parents of from) and "hoch (sp?) deutsch", which they
learned in school. The funniest thing is when I think about it, most of
he words I know are also in two forms, yet I was never formally
schooled!

Anyways, languages can be quite fascinating, listening to dutch is a
treat because of the mix of German and French, it's just too bad that
I'm not very good at learning them. TTYL

2006\07\31@220753 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

> The other thing that always fascinated me about German is how almost
> every younger German speaking person knows TWO versions of German. Once
> is their local dialect (where milch sounds like muech, in the case of
> Sterya where my parents of from) and "hoch (sp?) deutsch", which they
> learned in school.

Yup. I tend to think of Hochdeutsch as a foreign language, one that I read
and write quite well, but don't feel that comfortable speaking. Quite
similar to how I think some Southerners I met might be feeling :)

Gerhard


'[OT] a definite blood.boiler Wheeeeee !'
2006\08\01@105442 by Howard Winter
face
flavicon
picon face
Gerhard,

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:41:57 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> > Learning french in school was always very difficult for me since there
> > were so many things like this which didn't seem to have any reason for
> > being.
>
> I'm not sure how that is in German (you know, I just "know" it :), but
> while English has some things going for it in terms of being easy to learn,
> pronunciation is pure hell. As a non-native speaker, even after many many
> years, I still don't know how to pronounce a new word that I've never heard
> before.

May I let you in on a secret?  Me too! :-)  Not only is there no way to predict how a word in English should be pronounced, it may vary
depending on where you come from!  Place names in particular, have very strange unpredictable pronunciations which people from other parts
of the country would not know.  A couple of examples off the top of my head: Prudhoe ("prudduh"), Mousehole ("mowzle") are small towns
that non-locals would get wrong on the first attempt.  Except that Mousehole is slightly famous and a fair number of people do know about
it.  Larger towns and cities have pronunciations that "everyone knows", such as those ending "-cester", pronounced "ster", such as
Leicester "lester",  Gloucester "gloster", and... an exception: Cirencester which is pronounced "siren-sesster".  I don't know why!  Then
there's Loughborough "luff-burruh", and so on.

BUT!  The thing is that if you get it wrong, nobody will mind.  They will usually know what you mean, and they will correct you, but
there's no embarassment in that, you didn't know and they are telling you so that you know next time.  And this applies not just to
placenames, but the language itself - whereas in France to be understood it seems to be necessary to speak not only with the correct
words, but also accent, intonation, and hand-waving, in England we are used to hearing our language mangled by others (including those
from other parts of England :-) and we can usually work out what you mean.  And we get very many American TV programmes here, so
understanding an American accent isn't a problem, but the reverse is not the case.  I was very surprised to find when I first visited the
US that I often had to repeat myself (sometimes more than once, and slowly!) because Americans aren't expecting a non-American
accent/dialect.  Witness the fact that when a UK television series is bought by the US, they often remake it with American actors and
re-set it in the US rather than just showing it as-is.  And I've heard that sometimes if they do show it in its original form, they have
subtitles!  :-)

Incidentally, I learned French at school for about 5 years, and German for 1 year.  After which my German is *much* better than my French
(neither is very good though!) for reasons I don't understand, but German seems so much easier, more logical, easier to understand.  And
of course I can just use neuter for anything that isn't a person, and they'll understand what I mean! :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2006\08\01@162952 by Richard Prosser

picon face
And then there's the Kiwi version - "you" for singular, "youse" for
plural. (As in "Youse guys going down the pub?")

RP

On 02/08/06, Howard Winter <.....HDRWKILLspamspam.....h2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2006\08\01@165506 by John Pfaff

picon face
I haven't been paying much attention to this thread, but has anybody
brought up the Souther US version:

Y'all - singular
All y'all - plural

Richard Prosser wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>> --

2006\08\10@085944 by William Couture

face picon face
On 8/10/06, Tony Smith <ajsmithspamspam_OUTrivernet.com.au> wrote:

> Gah!  There's always one in a crowd  :)
>
> Yep, everything expands proportionally, including the holes (whatever shape
> they may be).  I don't know of any homogenous metal that shrinks when
> heated...
>
> Some people remain unconvinced of this, no amount of logic or reason will
> sway them.  It gets more frustrating when said skeptic states "Well yes, I
> have heated up metal to be able to get a bearing in or out, but I still
> don't believe the hole gets bigger".  Gadzooks!
>
> Aliens.  Must be aliens.  Gotta get my tinfoil hat to stop the rays.

You know how you "rivet" aircraft aluminum?

Drill matching holes in parts, put together, and line up holes.

Take rivet from bath of liquid nitrogen.

Put into holes.

When rivet warms up, it expands to fill holes.  Parts are now
riveted.

Bill

--
Psst...  Hey, you... Buddy...  Want a kitten?  straycatblues.petfinder.org

2006\08\10@093504 by Tony Smith

picon face
{Quote hidden}

Yes, that's what I said...

You could also put the plane in a very big oven and heat it up, thus
expanding the holes the rivets go it.  When the plane cools down, the parts
are riveted.

...except some people believe the holes would get smaller...

!

Still, I've never heard of that method.  Dipping rivets in nitrogen?
Really?  And I thought explosive rivets were cool.

Tony

2006\08\10@110123 by William Couture

face picon face
On 8/10/06, Gerhard Fiedler <@spam@listsKILLspamspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:

> Let's say you have a big chunk of metal. And let's say you take a flame to
> the immediate neighborhood of the hole. And let's say the chunk itself
> (farther away from the hole) stays at room temperature; only the area
> around the hole gets heated. Does the hole get bigger?

If you take a straight piece of metal and heat it, it will get longer.

Everyone can agree on this, right?

If you take the same piece of straight metal, bend it into a ring, and
heat it, it will *STILL* get longer.

Circumference = 2 * PI * R

So, if the circumference is getting bigger, it's radius must also be
getting bigger.  The hole expands.

If you heat the middle (containing a hole) of a piece of metal, it will
expand.  But the rest of the piece isn't getting out of it's way to
make expansion easy.  This introduces stress in the piece of
metal.

Bill

--
Psst...  Hey, you... Buddy...  Want a kitten?  straycatblues.petfinder.org

2006\08\10@144534 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
William Couture wrote:

> If you heat the middle (containing a hole) of a piece of metal, it will
> expand.  But the rest of the piece isn't getting out of it's way to make
> expansion easy.  This introduces stress in the piece of metal.

Right: "introduces stress". So what does this stress do to the hole?

This is a normal situation when (gas) welding, isn't it? I don't think
people usually heat the complete sheet up to welding temperature when they
weld a piece to a sheet. So there is then a hot area in the middle,
surrounded by a cooler area. What happens to a hole in the hot area in the
middle? (You probably shouldn't try that with cast iron, but that's a
different story.)

So far even Tony's argument ("'Gadzooks!'") didn't really sound too
scientific about what happens in this situation to a hole.

Gerhard

2006\08\10@150330 by William Couture

face picon face
On 8/10/06, Gerhard Fiedler <KILLspamlistsKILLspamspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> William Couture wrote:
>
> > If you heat the middle (containing a hole) of a piece of metal, it will
> > expand.  But the rest of the piece isn't getting out of it's way to make
> > expansion easy.  This introduces stress in the piece of metal.
>
> Right: "introduces stress". So what does this stress do to the hole?
>
> This is a normal situation when (gas) welding, isn't it? I don't think
> people usually heat the complete sheet up to welding temperature when they
> weld a piece to a sheet. So there is then a hot area in the middle,
> surrounded by a cooler area. What happens to a hole in the hot area in the
> middle? (You probably shouldn't try that with cast iron, but that's a
> different story.)
>
> So far even Tony's argument ("'Gadzooks!'") didn't really sound too
> scientific about what happens in this situation to a hole.

I suggest an experiment:
  1) A piece of metal with a hole in it
  2) A THIN-WALLED glass "jar" the exact size of the hole in the metal
      (a light bulb will do)
  3) Appropriate heat source.

Put glass "jar" in hole.  Apply heat.

See if "jar" breaks.   If it does, the hole has shrunk.

If it falls out, the hole has expanded.

Let me know how this turns out.

Bill

--
Psst...  Hey, you... Buddy...  Want a kitten?  straycatblues.petfinder.org

2006\08\10@155459 by Tony Smith

picon face
> > If you heat the middle (containing a hole) of a piece of metal, it
> > will expand.  But the rest of the piece isn't getting out
> of it's way
> > to make expansion easy.  This introduces stress in the
> piece of metal.
>
> Right: "introduces stress". So what does this stress do to the hole?
>
> This is a normal situation when (gas) welding, isn't it? I
> don't think people usually heat the complete sheet up to
> welding temperature when they weld a piece to a sheet. So
> there is then a hot area in the middle, surrounded by a
> cooler area. What happens to a hole in the hot area in the
> middle? (You probably shouldn't try that with cast iron, but
> that's a different story.)
>
> So far even Tony's argument ("'Gadzooks!'") didn't really
> sound too scientific about what happens in this situation to a hole.


The hole gets bigger.

For thin metal the metal around the hole will buckle (welding is a pain,
regardless of method).  For thicker stuff (i.e. cast iron) it may crack the
metal outside the heated zone.

That's why you heat up the whole piece.  Some people dip big castings into
heated oil baths.

The answer is either nothing / too small to measure / it gets bigger / it
get bigger and damages the piece, resulting in Gadzooks! being heard.

Note 'gets smaller' isn't on the list.

Tony

2006\08\10@233614 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
William Couture wrote:

> I suggest an experiment:
>    1) A piece of metal with a hole in it
>    2) A THIN-WALLED glass "jar" the exact size of the hole in the metal
>        (a light bulb will do)
>    3) Appropriate heat source.
>
> Put glass "jar" in hole.  Apply heat.
>
> See if "jar" breaks.   If it does, the hole has shrunk.
>
> If it falls out, the hole has expanded.
>
> Let me know how this turns out.

I might do that if/when I have the required equipment. OTOH, the expansion
coefficient of glass (9 ppm/K) is close to the one of iron/steel (12
ppm/K), so this is probably not the best "hole filler". Quartz (<1 ppm/K)
is probably better (but more difficult to find around the house).

Gerhard

2006\08\11@075457 by VULCAN20

picon face
I asked a friend of mine who does blacksmithing, this was his answer.
If the whole sheet of steel is heated evenly the hole will enlarge.
if just the area around the hole is heated the hole will decrease.
IMHO From my line of thinking it makes sense. but not to sure.
just a thought


Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2006\08\11@101148 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
VULCAN20 wrote:

> I asked a friend of mine who does blacksmithing, this was his answer. If
> the whole sheet of steel is heated evenly the hole will enlarge. if just
> the area around the hole is heated the hole will decrease. IMHO From my
> line of thinking it makes sense. but not to sure. just a thought

Yeah! Thanks a lot :)  Not a proof (and there probably will be people who
contest that :), but a confirmation.

I thought it might be like this, but I'm not really the blacksmith guy who
has done this a thousand times.

See also my other message in the "[OT] Holes get smaller" thread about why
I think holes may get smaller under the right circumstances.

Gerhard

2006\08\11@111757 by Tony Smith

picon face
{Quote hidden}

Pyrex has COTE of about 3.

Glass fusers are very concerned in the expansion properties of glass.  Glass
is 8.5 to 10 (mostly 9), if you fused two pieces together and the difference
between the expansions rates is even 0.1 apart, the glass will crack.

Interesting picture at the bottom of this page -
http://www.warmglass.com/Compatibility_testing.htm.  Under polarised light,
the incompatability shows up.

(Glass people move the decimal point, so 9 is 90).

Tony

2006\08\13@021715 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I do find your comment interesting though. I've never liked
> using "sie",
> it just "sounds" a little off to me. But I've been told that
> you should
> NEVER use "du", except for family and close friends. What's you're
> opinion on using "du"? Would addressing a waiter with "du" be a huge
> taboo to you?
>
> As a concept this sort of thing is difficult for me. English is very
> "neutral" in many ways.

Actually, from a person living "inbetween": as a formal language English
might be easier, but as a living language it is more difficult in this
aspect because the distinction Germans express with du/sie is expressed
in English in far more subtle ways (and with lots of nuances!).

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2006\08\13@083455 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Wouter,

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 08:17:12 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:

> Actually, from a person living "inbetween": as a formal language English
> might be easier, but as a living language it is more difficult in this
> aspect because the distinction Germans express with du/sie is expressed
> in English in far more subtle ways (and with lots of nuances!).

Unless you're in Yorkshire, where subtlety seems to have been eliminated from the gene pool!  :-)

Actually I find it rather hard to see the distinctions we're talking about, and I wonder if it's something that we don't really do in
English?  Speaking with my friends and family I would use nicknames or pet names (I call my brother Stuart "Stu", his wife calls him
"Stuarty") but I'm not sure there's any difference in the language.  

As a foreign-speaker you could use the same way of speaking with everybody, and it wouldn't be thought of as unusual.  In fact if you
tried to get into more informal speech it would sound "funny" to us.  I remember a chinese girl (who had only been in Britain for a week
or so, from Beijing) said "Well, I'll go to the foot of our stairs!" and it greatly amused the group of English people, because it's
specifically an expression from Northern England and it sounds very odd around here.  Perhaps like a foreigner saying "Y'all" in New York.  

(It means "I am very surprised", by the way :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2006\08\13@114504 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Howard Winter wrote:

> Actually I find it rather hard to see the distinctions we're talking
> about, and I wonder if it's something that we don't really do in
> English?  Speaking with my friends and family I would use nicknames or
> pet names (I call my brother Stuart "Stu", his wife calls him "Stuarty")
> but I'm not sure there's any difference in the language.

Wouldn't you talk differently to, say, a judge? You probably won't address
her by her first name :)

Gerhard

2006\08\13@135027 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Gerhard,

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:42:06 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

{Quote hidden}

No, but then I don't often say "Not Guilty, your honour" to my brother!  :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2006\08\13@141605 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 08:17 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > I do find your comment interesting though. I've never liked
> > using "sie",
> > it just "sounds" a little off to me. But I've been told that
> > you should
> > NEVER use "du", except for family and close friends. What's you're
> > opinion on using "du"? Would addressing a waiter with "du" be a huge
> > taboo to you?
> >
> > As a concept this sort of thing is difficult for me. English is very
> > "neutral" in many ways.
>
> Actually, from a person living "inbetween": as a formal language English
> might be easier, but as a living language it is more difficult in this
> aspect because the distinction Germans express with du/sie is expressed
> in English in far more subtle ways (and with lots of nuances!).

Hmm, interesting, can you think of some examples?

Thanks, TTYL

2006\08\13@151537 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> > Actually, from a person living "inbetween": as a formal
> language English
> > might be easier, but as a living language it is more
> difficult in this
> > aspect because the distinction Germans express with du/sie
> is expressed
> > in English in far more subtle ways (and with lots of nuances!).
>
> Hmm, interesting, can you think of some examples?

No, but I remember this from the days I worked on an international
project, with Germans, Englishs, Italians, Danes and whatnot. It might
be more of an issue in a professional setting than in private talk.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2006\08\13@154748 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

> Hmm, interesting, can you think of some examples?

I think it's not that different. It's just that the "Sie/du" difference
doesn't exist in English. But the "Herbert" vs "Mr. Graf" difference
exists.

So when you listen in to a German conversation and you hear them all say
"du", you can chime in with "du", too. But when they say "du", they (almost
always) also say "Herbert". So you could just listen to that instead of
"du". I do the same in English: if they all say "Herbert" to each other, I
do so too, and if they say "Mr. Graf", that's what I use, too. (I'm using
your name as a placeholder :)

I think those "in between" levels are not that different. There are
situations where you'd say something like "this is a damn piece of junk"
and hit it with your boot, and others where you'd say something like "this
is not properly built" and maybe clear your throat to release the anger :)

Gerhard

2006\08\13@173203 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 21:15 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > > Actually, from a person living "inbetween": as a formal
> > language English
> > > might be easier, but as a living language it is more
> > difficult in this
> > > aspect because the distinction Germans express with du/sie
> > is expressed
> > > in English in far more subtle ways (and with lots of nuances!).
> >
> > Hmm, interesting, can you think of some examples?
>
> No, but I remember this from the days I worked on an international
> project, with Germans, Englishs, Italians, Danes and whatnot. It might
> be more of an issue in a professional setting than in private talk.

Well offhand I can't really think of any case where the du/sie
difference in German would apply in English, in NORMAL environments. Of
course, there are some areas of the english world where you still
address your boss as "Mr./Ms. Whatever", but that's getting rarer. There
are also cases such as when talking to the queen or a judge that you'd
use more formal names, but still, you'd use "you", and the sentences
involved, aside from the name used, wouldn't be much different.

Having never FORMALLY learned the English language (aside from our
classes called "english" where we did writing and things like that) I am
always interested in what people who had to learn english formally
notice about this very messed up language! :)

TTYL

2006\08\13@173855 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 16:47 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
>
> > Hmm, interesting, can you think of some examples?
>
> I think it's not that different. It's just that the "Sie/du" difference
> doesn't exist in English. But the "Herbert" vs "Mr. Graf" difference
> exists.
>
> So when you listen in to a German conversation and you hear them all say
> "du", you can chime in with "du", too. But when they say "du", they (almost
> always) also say "Herbert". So you could just listen to that instead of
> "du". I do the same in English: if they all say "Herbert" to each other, I
> do so too, and if they say "Mr. Graf", that's what I use, too. (I'm using
> your name as a placeholder :)

Yes, that was the only difference I could think of, but it's
disappearing. Of all my jobs, only the first one was one where I called
the owner of the company by Mister. His son, who ran the company, and
was "the boss" was always addressed by first name. Every job I've had
since that one, I've addressed my boss, and all bosses by there first
name. In fact the CEO of the company I work for now (a rather large
company) is addressed by his first name.

Another good example of the vast difference between English and German
in this regard is something as simple as people working at a retail
store. All the german name tags I saw had "Herr whatever", or "Frau
whatever". Where I am, all the name tags just have the first name.

I suppose the Ms/Mrs/Miss is a distinction that can catch people, my
advice? Always use Ms unless you really know the person.

Very interesting. TTYL

2006\08\13@174220 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

> Well offhand I can't really think of any case where the du/sie
> difference in German would apply in English, in NORMAL environments. Of
> course, there are some areas of the english world where you still
> address your boss as "Mr./Ms. Whatever", but that's getting rarer.

What I'm thinking of is something like you're working at GE or Honda or any
other big company and the VP comes for a visit with you department boss. Or
you're meeting for the first time a prospective client. Wouldn't you say
"Mr." in those situations?

(It doesn't help a lot what you learn for those situations, you need to
know what people do and therefore expect :)

Gerhard

2006\08\13@180231 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

> Another good example of the vast difference between English and German
> in this regard is something as simple as people working at a retail
> store. All the german name tags I saw had "Herr whatever", or "Frau
> whatever". Where I am, all the name tags just have the first name.

Yes, that shows that difference. The name tags don't tell how the employees
call each other, but in most "normal" work environments the boss calls the
employees by their last names.

> I suppose the Ms/Mrs/Miss is a distinction that can catch people, my
> advice? Always use Ms unless you really know the person.

I have my problems pronouncing the Ms :)  In German, you'd go safe with
"Frau".

Gerhard

2006\08\13@204026 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 18:41 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
>
> > Well offhand I can't really think of any case where the du/sie
> > difference in German would apply in English, in NORMAL environments. Of
> > course, there are some areas of the english world where you still
> > address your boss as "Mr./Ms. Whatever", but that's getting rarer.
>
> What I'm thinking of is something like you're working at GE or Honda or any
> other big company and the VP comes for a visit with you department boss. Or
> you're meeting for the first time a prospective client. Wouldn't you say
> "Mr." in those situations?

In the company I work for absolutely not, everyone is on a first name
basis, and we're a relatively big company (ATI).

This trend started a few years ago, sort of an "open door policy", with
many companies other then mine.

TTYL

2006\08\14@042150 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> ... Germans, Englishs, Italians, Danes


Just "English" probably.
Or Englanders  :-)


       R (NZer) M

2006\08\15@033403 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 20:18:31 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:

> > ... Germans, Englishs, Italians, Danes
>
>
> Just "English" probably.
> Or Englanders  :-)

"Englishmen" will do! :-)  The "men" part isn't gender-specific in this case.  But whether the OP intended to exclude Scots, Welsh and
Ulstermen (from Northern Ireland) isn't clear... if not, "Britons" would be the one to use.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...