|   Alle Sprachen   
EN   SV   IS   RU   RO   FR   IT   SK   NL   PT   FI   LA   ES   HU   NO   BG   HR   CS   DA   TR   PL   EO   SR   SQ   EL   BS   |   FR   SK   IS   ES   NL   HU   RO   PL   SV   NO   RU   FI   SQ   IT   DA   CS   PT   HR   BG   LA   EO   SR   BS   TR   EL

Deutsch-Englisch-Wörterbuch

Online-Wörterbuch Englisch-Deutsch: Begriff hier eingeben!
  äöüß...
  Optionen | Tipps | FAQ | Abkürzungen

LoginRegistrieren
Home|New Website|About|Vokabeltrainer|Fachgebiete|Benutzer|Forum|Mitmachen!
Übersetzungsforum Deutsch-Englisch
 fully automatic defense suppression firearm »
« grid    

English-German Translation Forum

« zurück | Antworten aus- oder einblenden | Diskussion beobachten
Frage:
Passive Voice v. Predicative Adjective  
von Catesse (AU), Last modified: 2010-11-17, 12:07  like dislike  Spam?  
Within the last 24 hours, entry # 1008416 was made and verified without any English native-speaking registered contributor noticing it. I would simply re-open, but there is at stake a general principle that needs attention.
The entry said: "to be slightly injured = leicht verletzt werden". After several votes had been made, this was changed to "to be slightly injured = leicht verletzt sein".
The point is that both translations are correct, but they refer to different circumstances.
1. Er wurde bei dem Unfall leicht verletzt. [Passive Voice]
2. Es geht ihm nicht schlecht; er ist nur leicht verletzt. [Predicative adjective; a state, not an action.]
Or was the German I taught for 20 years faulty?
Since the original entry was correct, according to GL it should not have been altered. I checked to see whether one of the forms had already been entered, but apparently neither was. The best solution, in justice to all, seems to be to re-open this as a split entry.
But would contributors please be on the alert for similar ambiguities?
I hope this does not lead to a discussion as lengthy as some recent ones.
Antwort: 
You are right - the German side should be "leicht verletzt sein/werden" or something the like.  #555977
von Baccalaureus (DE), 2010-11-17, 12:08  like dislike  Spam?  
Antwort: 
Similar entries  #555978
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-17, 12:11  like dislike  Spam?  
On checking further, I see that there are at least two similar entries:
to be severely wounded
to be critically wounded
I have no doubt that a similar situation has arisen in quite different contexts, so I think that it was worthwhile to put this on Forum.
Antwort: 
Is there a need for passive entries at all?  #555982
von jb (GB), 2010-11-17, 12:28  like dislike  Spam?  
I ask this since approval of such entries, i.e. past participle + auxiliary verb sein or werden, could well open the floodgates to redundancy.
Antwort: 
Redundancy  #555989
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-17, 12:46  like dislike  Spam?  
On that basis, is there a place for predicative adjectives?
Perhaps it could just be entered as "leicht verletzt".
Antwort: 
von wandle (GB), Last modified: 2010-11-17, 13:08  like dislike  Spam?  
 #555990
Based on my short-lived foray into the contribution side, and the continuing debates in the forum, it seems to me that those gates are already open, and that they can hardly be closed without the exercise of some editorial control.  Of course, I do see that that is something for which a collaborative enterprise of this kind is by nature not well suited.
Antwort: 
In case we start now entering all verbs in passive voice as well: good luck!  #555996
von Wuffke (DE), 2010-11-17, 13:03  like dislike  Spam?  
vergessen werden, vergessen sein, gemalt werden, gemalt sein usw. usf. I promise: We are opening Pandora's box.
Chat:     
Oh, yes, please, let's open it! You'll find hope at its very bottom.  #556010
von Baccalaureus (DE), 2010-11-17, 13:33  like dislike  Spam?  
Are you guys crazy!? The "sein/werden" thing is an elementary feature of the German language - one is really supposed to know the VERY BASICS of a language, before one opens adictionary. I don't know any that lists verbs in passive voice... This is so pointless!
Antwort: 
Equality of opportunity.   #556012
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-17, 13:34  like dislike  Spam?  
The case for separate entries for the extended form of predicative adjectives is no better and no worse than that for the Passive Voice.
In that case, for this entry, there was a case for suggesting (politely) a deletion. There was little justification for changing a correct but possibly redundant entry arbitrarily to an equally correct but equally redundant form.
There is something to be said for dictatorships.
Allow one form; allow both forms; allow neither form. I could live with any of these outcomes. What I find difficult to live with is inconsistency and unfairness.
Antwort: 
sein / werden seems a very good suggestion for these cases.  #556022
von ddr (AT), Last modified: 2010-11-17, 14:00  like dislike  Spam?  
(Much better than two seperate entries!)
That both is "be" baffles German speakers again and again, even if they've read hundreds of English books etc. and should know. So I think such entries may be useful.
And as far as I've understood it, this dictionary is not meant for people who know all about grammar (only).
Antwort: 
ddr:  #556027
von Wuffke (DE), 2010-11-17, 14:12  like dislike  Spam?  
"Der Fahrer wird bei dem Unfall leicht verletzt." (So oder ähnlich schreibt es Spiegel-Online etwa täglich, und alle anderen Zeitungen machen mit. Und wir sollen diesen Unsinn nun auch mitmachen. Ohne mich. Oder ist das für Fälle gedacht, in denen der Doktor sagt: Sie werden jetzt gleich leicht verletzt? Oder: Vorsicht, Sie werden leicht verletzt? Das ist doch Unsinn, so etwas einzutragen. Das stiftet nur hochgradig Verwirrung.
Antwort: 
Die Einträge "leicht verletzt sein" und "leicht verletzt werden" gehören eigentlich gelöscht.  #556028
von Wuffke (DE), 2010-11-17, 14:16  like dislike  Spam?  
Chat:     
Und wie erklärt man die Zweideutigkeit der Aussage "Ich bin leicht verletzt"?  #556038
von Baccalaureus (DE), 2010-11-17, 14:36  like dislike  Spam?  
Chat:     
Bacca  #556040
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-17, 14:42  like dislike  Spam?  
Good for a laugh, Bacca. Too true, too true, and in just the appropriate place. :-)
Antwort: 
Hilfe! Und was ist an leicht verletzt werden falsch?  #556067
von ddr (AT), 2010-11-17, 16:03  like dislike  Spam?  
Wenn man im Präsenz erzählt oder berichtet?
Antwort: 
Wird man durch diesen Eintrag schwer oder nur leicht verletzt?  #556078
von jb (GB), 2010-11-17, 18:25  like dislike  Spam?  
Sein oder nicht sein bzw. werden - das ist die Frage!
Antwort: 
Precisely because English does not distinguish between passive and predicate adjective constructions, I hold such entries to be quite useful  #556095
von tomaquinaten (US/DE), Last modified: 2010-11-17, 19:45  like dislike  Spam?  
provided they are disambiguated! For this reason, the suggestion to enter them as "to be <passive part.>" = "<Part. Aktiv> sein / werden" is problematical, since it does not indicate to the English user when the one or the other German verb is to be used. Thus, if we make such entries -- and I think a good case can be made for doing so -- then according to the following pattern:
"to be slightly injured [passiv]  =  leicht verletzt werden"
"to be slightly injured [adjectival]  =  leicht verletzt sein"
Although as Bacc points out, the distinction between "sein" und "werden" is an elementary point of German grammar, as ddr also points out, many people have long forgotten the grammar they learned in school or, if they are self-taught, may never have learned at all. The argument about redundancy like the argument that other dictionaries do not make such entries has little force in an online dictionary, where such entries only appear to those who look for them and otherwise disturb no one. For my money, the only really telling argument against making such entries is Wuffke's implied suggestion that with this "Pandora's Box" we put an unnecessary burden on reviewers who will have then to check and vote on thousands of entries of this type made by contributors who take pleasure in making bulk entries. I admit that this argument cannot be discounted!
In any case, I agree with Catessa: whatever course we decide on, we should be consistent.  EITHER WE ADMIT SUCH ENTRIES; THEN IN BOTH FORMS AND WITH DISAMBIGUATION OR WE EXCLUDE THEM ALTOGETHER:  Admitting them, however, does NOT NECESSARILY mean that we must ALWAYS make them  We could perhaps agree to MAKE THEM ONLY WHEN THERE IS PLAUSIBLE DANGER OF CONFUSION. This would mean that the author of such paired entries must offer good reasons and that the voters should weigh these before voting for or against them.
  For the kind of erroneous usage pilloried by Wuffke, "wird" statt "wurde". as in  ""Der Fahrer wird bei dem Unfall leicht verletzt.", I see no need for action on our part. Clearly we cannot warn our users against all possible abuses of the English or the German language. If the intention in such a case (ddr makes such a suggestion above) is to use the narrative present instead of the past tense -- a practice much more common in German than in English -- , the correct form should have been "Der Fahrer ist bei dem Unfall leicht verletzt worden". Under "worden" we have a considerable number of entries illustrating the German present passive construction using "ist <passive participle> worden" to translate the English "has been  + passive participle" construction. I see no need to multiply these. Perhaps, however, the basic (one word) entry for "been = worden" could be improved, for example, by making two entries disambiguated on the English side:
"have / has been ... [past-p] [as present passive verb] = ist / sind ... [past-p] worden"
"have / has been ... [past-p] [as perfect passive verb] = wurde /wurden ... [past-p]".
Antwort: 
Computer  #556158
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-18, 00:42  like dislike  Spam?  
Wuffke has a point with regard to the possibility of having the site flooded with a mass of entries of what seem to be pointless entries. This has happened on several occasions. Witness some of the useless rubbish being entered in the Inflections. However:
1. Nobody is compelled to vote on these entries, although they may build up annoyingly.
2. Are such entries helpful to the user, who may well be searching desperately for something in a language barely understood?
3. Would they overload the system's storage capacity or impair the computer's capacity to retrieve entries? Only Paul can answer that.
Antwort: 
I think such entries serve no useful purpose.  #556166
von Kiskunfelegyhaza (US), 2010-11-18, 04:01  like dislike  Spam?  
In the past, such entries have always had "sein / to be" hacked off of them and were reduced to the very useful adjective. I don't think the kinds of grammar labels Tomaquinaten is proposing would be particularly helpful to a dictionary user - such things can be found in much clearer terms on german.about.com or something. I agree with the Pandora's box analogy. Had I come across this entry, I would have suggested "delete."
Antwort: 
seltsamerweise  #556192
von ddr (AT), Last modified: 2010-11-18, 12:17  like dislike  Spam?  
haben wir 3 'verletzt sein' und 2 'verletzt werden' Einträge. Keiner der verletzt werden-Einträge lautet 'to be hurt' etc., sondern 'to get hurt' bzw. 'to receive an injury'.
Ich habe bei meiner Meinungsäußerung zugegebenermaßen nur an deutschsprachige User gedacht, für die der 'verletzt sein/werden'-Eintrag nützlich wäre, da das Konzept schwer in deutschsprachige Hirne zu kriegen ist. Ich sehe aber ein, dass er englischsprachigen Benutzern nicht viel bringen würde. 2 disambiguierte Einträge wären da wohl doch nützlicher, z.B. 'to be hurt [receive an injury]/verletzt werden'.
Den Sinn der Dikussion (ich meine nicht Catesses Einstieg) verstehe ich aber immer noch nicht ganz, wir haben Berge solcher Einträge. 'Pandoras Box' ist längst geöffnet und das dict. ist bisher nicht darunter zusammengebochen.
Im Großen und Ganzen würde ich mich Tom anschließen, nur nicht neue grammatikalische Kategorien einführen, sondern lieber erklären.
Antwort: 
Catesse:  #556198
von parker11 (DE), Last modified: 2010-11-18, 10:09  like dislike  Spam?  
1. Nobody is compelled to vote on these entries, although they may build up annoyingly.
Absolut richtig. ABER:
Jeder aktive Mitarbeiter hier ist verdonnert, diese (und nicht nur diese) Einträge zu lesen und den Kopf zu schütteln über diesen neuerlichen Wahnwitz. Und anschließend - wenn er im Sinne von dict.cc hier gern mitmacht oder zumindest mal gerne mitgemacht hat - ist er verdonnert, eine Entscheidung zu treffen. Bleibt er passiv oder will er lieber aktiv werden (oops, was ein Zufall, passt ja richtig rein in diesen Thread)? Ändert, löscht oder bestätigt er diesen Eintrag? Oder ignoriert er ihn einfach? Verärgert er den Eintragenden, erfreut er einen anderen Gleichdenkenden? Ruft er eine erneute Grundsatzdiskussion hervor? Tut er Gutes oder Schlechtes? Interessant wäre es, Pauls Meinung zum Thema zu hören.
Tja, das sind so Fragen, die ich mir im Moment prinzipiell zum Sinn und Zweck meiner Mitarbeit bei dict.cc stelle.
Antwort: 
Catesse / question 3.  #556202
von Paul (AT), 2010-11-18, 10:15  like dislike  Spam?  
It's almost impossible to overload the system's storage capacity just by adding a lot of (useful) entries. However, lots of similar or useless entries create the problem of long and confusing search results pages, which make it harder to find the translation one was looking for.
Antwort: 
Grundsätzlich bitte keine Masseninputs oder Massenänderungen ohne vorherige Diskussion.  #556204
von Paul (AT), 2010-11-18, 10:24  like dislike  Spam?  
Viele ähnliche Einträge im Allgemeinen bitte eher vermeiden, um die Suchergebnisseiten nicht unübersichtlich werden zu lassen.
Antwort: 
Clarity  #556210
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-18, 11:01  like dislike  Spam?  
I am not taking personal offence at anything that has been said by anybody. However: since I have made fewer that 400 inputs on the DE-EN site in more than 18 months, it could hardly be said that I am overloading the site with entries, useful or useless. Here I mostly just vote; I contribute Input to other sites.
I don't give a toss how this discussion is settled. I do not seek to impose my preferences on anybody. I just want this (and any other matters of disagreement) SETTLED, one way or another, so that people are not constantly at one another's throats. At times these conflicts make DE-EN a not particularly happy place to be.
Decision made. Decision publicised. Decision obeyed. End of story. Shape up or ship out.
And the decision is up to Paul.
Antwort: 
Okay, zum konkreten Eintrag:  #556223
von Paul (AT), 2010-11-18, 11:26  like dislike  Spam?  
Den Eintrag http://contribute.dict.cc/?action=show-history&id=1008416 kann man splitten, so wie von Catesse vorgeschlagen, wenn es darum geht, Outvotes zu umgehen. Ansonsten gilt aber die Standardregel, dass die zuerst vorgeschlagene korrekte Variante bestätigt werden soll. Bitte nicht neue Einträge wie diesen mit "sein" posten, wenn es ihn mit "werden" schon gibt und umgekehrt, um unübersichtliche Suchergebnisseiten zu vermeiden.
Antwort: 
Paul  #556239
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-18, 12:08  like dislike  Spam?  
The judgment of Solomon, Paul.
Now to get people to understand the concept.
Would it be too much to enter it in GL so that it can be referred to?
(I am crawling back to my cushion by the fireplace and not entering anything of this nature at all.)
Antwort: 
Okay, but what could that be?  #556243
von Paul (AT), 2010-11-18, 12:24  like dislike  Spam?  
Maybe I could add "Please don't add long entries that are very similar to already existing ones (near-duplicates)." as the last line in guideline 2? I don't want to specifically address the "sein" and "werden" issue as a guideline, because this also applies to a lot of other situations. Or maybe as an example. Suggestions?
Antwort: 
Paul  #556251
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-18, 12:53  like dislike  Spam?  
Dear Paul, I have quite a reputation for raising questions to which I cannot give an answer and identifying problems that I cannot solve. Sorry.
Antwort: 
von uffie (GH/KI), Last modified: 2010-12-14, 23:31  like dislike  Spam?  
 #556364
Antwort: 
ufriend  #556397
von Catesse (AU), 2010-11-19, 00:58  like dislike  Spam?  
If only! The problem is not so acute on this DE-EN site, but there are sites where some contributor flies into a tantrum if you suggest that a disambiguation might be desirable, and other sites where there are so many complicated disambiguations that entries are left unverified because nobody can understand them, although the word itself is clear.
Talk about tiptoeing through minefields of temperament!

Optional: Login | Registrieren 
  Frage beantworten oder Kommentar hinzufügen
Please log in to post an answer to this thread - or post a new question.
nach oben | home© 2002 - 2024 Paul Hemetsberger | Impressum / Datenschutz
Dieses Deutsch-Englisch-Wörterbuch basiert auf der Idee der freien Weitergabe von Wissen. Mehr dazu
Enthält Übersetzungen von der TU Chemnitz sowie aus Mr Honey's Business Dictionary (Englisch/Deutsch). Vielen Dank dafür!
Links auf dieses Wörterbuch oder einzelne Übersetzungen sind herzlich willkommen! Fragen und Antworten
Werbung