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


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

Übersetzungsforum Deutsch-Englisch
 chronic kidney injury »
« E-mails are not attended.    

English-German Translation Forum

« zurück | Antworten aus- oder einblenden | Diskussion beobachten
Lengthy bible verses  
von aphoenix (US), Last modified: 2017-09-05, 02:17  like dislike  Spam?  
Does this belong in  (Thanks, Jim for pointing out my error).
von Jim46 (US), Last modified: 2017-09-05, 02:30  like dislike  Spam?  
It seems out of the realm of a dictionary to me.
So you think many of these entries are inadequate?  #877946
von parker11 (DE), Last modified: 2017-09-05, 04:51  like dislike  Spam?  
von aphoenix (US), Last modified: 2017-09-05, 05:39  like dislike  Spam?  
4;parker11, I don't see how your question is relevant.  I checked (before posting the question), and found that most of the Bible verses included in the dictionary were (a) well known, and (b) much shorter than the one I cited.  There are quite a lot of verses in the Bible.  I assume that we do not want to include them all.
Wo ist das Problem?  #877958
von christinchen (DE), 2017-09-05, 09:54  like dislike  Spam?  
Wer soll denn definieren, was in dict gehört und was nicht? Bei über 1.000.000 Einträgen findet jede und jeder einen Eintrag, der in den eigenen Augen "überflüssig" ist. Das anerkannte Kriterium ist falsch oder richtig.
Deswegen meine Frage. Die Unübersichtlichkeit kann es in diesem Fall nicht sein: egal welches Wort du eingibst, der Eintrag landet ganz hinten. Dass der Eintrag nicht verifiziert ist? Dieses Schicksal teilt er mit 3745 Einträgen. Wenn so viele Einträge "hängen", dann spricht das vielleicht für ein strukturelles Problem, wenn es überhaupt ein Problem ist. Sie werden ja gekennzeichnet.
Sehe ich auch so wie Christinchen. Im Zweifel Paul fragen.  #877959
von parker11 (DE), 2017-09-05, 09:59  like dislike  Spam?  
von Paul (AT), 2017-09-05, 12:27  like dislike  Spam?  
Seems to do no harm. I guess we can keep it.
I would love to vote to delete it.  #878403
von polarjud (US), 2017-09-12, 03:36  like dislike  Spam?  
I guess that Paul is most interested in generating hits, so it is hard to say no to any class of entries.  I can understand that, certainly.  But Paul, you have in the past, complained about the number of unverified entries causing you to impose restrictions on new entries.  Here is a golden opportunity for you.  Do not allow entries longer than x characters or y words.  At least not in text that is unbracketed.
von Paul (AT), 2017-09-12, 11:08  like dislike  Spam?  
Generating hits is not a direct function of having more entries. Generating hits means being useful for the users, so they come back, tell others about it, or create links to Search engines makes web sites more prominent in their results lists if they can measure high user satisfaction with them.

If pages look cluttered and chaotic due to too many similar or useless entries, this is not being useful, it's counterproductive. So it's not hard to say no to useless entries (except for upsetting those who added them, that's always trouble).

Entries already have a length restriction. But: The longer an entry is, the closer it is sorted to the end of the search results list. So for If you search for "Erde", you will see that this entry is not blocking the most important translations like "soil", "earth" or "ground". You'll need to click through to page 3 to even find it. But if you're reading an old book, for example, and stumble across the term "Ruchlosen" or "knowest" you will at least get an idea or be reminded of the meaning of the word because of that entry.
von aphoenix (US), 2017-09-12, 14:15  like dislike  Spam?  
Wouldn't it be more useful to have entries for "Ruchlosen" and "knowest"?  They'd be much easier to find.  I'm not suggesting we need every archaic verb form, but "knowest" appears 100 times in the King James Bible according to
von Paul (AT), 2017-09-12, 16:22  like dislike  Spam?  
Could also be useful, but I find inflected and rare forms more useful when embedded in example phrases, so they don't clutter the search results pages when searched for from the other language.

An example: For "Ruchlosen" please see wicked - I'm quite happy to have it at the current position on this page. The most common translations for "wicked" are on top, so most users don't even need to scroll. Users searching for special cases or more detailed information usually accept investing more time in their research. In my opinion that's the best tradeoff in accommodating all kinds of dictionary users.
Not a hard or useful translation task  #878474
von polarjud (US), 2017-09-13, 03:42  like dislike  Spam?  
Anyone can look up a bible verse in an English-translation of the ancient Greek/Jewish text and also look up the same verse in Luther's translation to German.  What does that add?  I would argue that it actually subtracts.  Translations of more than three words of biblical texts should be forbidden.
von Paul (AT), 2017-09-13, 11:15  like dislike  Spam?  
Not everyone has an English and a German bible at home or has the time or even the idea to research this online. People might also come across these words outside of a biblical context. For me it's not so much about bible quotes, it doesn't have anything to do with being religious or not, it's about example sentences/phrases. They can be quite useful, as I tried to show.
I'm not saying "please add masses of bible quotes", but if I come across such an entry, I would rather keep it than delete it.
I won't endorse any, but neither will I vote to delete given your wishes  #878589
von polarjud (US), 2017-09-14, 03:26  like dislike  Spam?  
von Paul (AT), 2017-09-14, 11:04  like dislike  Spam?  
Thank you!
Sorry, but this really is irritating  #887770
von polarjud (US), 2018-03-01, 03:55  like dislike  Spam?  
After a period of quiet, a new bible verse has appeared.

I found that I had forgotten my commitment not to vote to delete these entries.  The idea of privileging the Christian bible when we would never tolerate lengthy quotes from other books is so offensive to me.
I agree thats lengthy quotes are useless and thus irritating ...  #887771
von aphoenix (US), 2018-03-01, 04:41  like dislike  Spam?  
especially when it is trivial to compare them online.  Anyone who is online using can go directly to the site
to compare any pair of bibles from a huge database. Thus it seems to me that it is useless to include them in  Worse than useless in fact, because they add bulk to the dictionary and to the output obtained for the words they contain.
All has been said about this subject, see Paul's posts in this thread above.  #887772
von parker11 (DE), 2018-03-01, 06:03  like dislike  Spam?  
I see no reason at all to delete this or similar entries.
4; aph-: there's much worse bulk and nonsense in It has been decided long ago to accept bible quotes. To quote Paul, they don't hurt or harm the structure and usability of
unter  #887773  #887774
von Wenz (DE), 2018-03-01, 06:51  like dislike  Spam?  
Einerseits will polarjud "old declensions", weil sie dem User (???) helfen.
Andererseits will er nützliche "grammatikalische Wendungen", die ich im Kontext vorlege, nicht akzeptieren ... wahrscheinlich weil sie aus der Bibel stammen. Aber woher ist doch egal, sie nützen dem Suchenden: .. if only it were xxx
Contributor rights  #887802
von polarjud (US), 2018-03-02, 02:38  like dislike  Spam?  
We all labor for the common good.  I am interested in old declensions because I want to help people like myself you are interested in old Germanic texts.  How does entering biblical texts help anyone?  As aphoenix writes, it could not be much simpler to compare biblical texts across languages and editions, since they are all numbered.  But these entries do violence to people like myself who find them offensive.  I think the better parallel is to the old debate about MILF.  Most women strongly object to the entry of MILF in this system.  If you look through the history, you will find multiple deletions of it.  And yet, to the curious reader of a certain genre, how will the word be understood unless it is dictionaries such as ours?  Having an entry for MILF does not mean that we approve of pornography, but it seems to me that privileging biblical verses as the only allowed long translations does send an unwelcome message.
grammatikalische Wendungen  #887803
von polarjud (US), 2018-03-02, 02:50  like dislike  Spam?  
Wenz: Why quotes around this phrase?  I would certainly have no objection to such, but why then add the Book, chapter, and verse of the bible?  Use 3 to 5 words that highlight the usage, leave out the numerology, and I  will gladly vote for it, as I do for almost all your other translations.
pol-: an unwelcome message to whom? Islamists? Well …  #887804
von parker11 (DE), 2018-03-02, 04:24  like dislike  Spam?  
Unwelcome to non-Christians of all stripes.   #887805
von polarjud (US), 2018-03-02, 05:00  like dislike  Spam?  
Speaking of Islam, I seem to recall that some Muslim started to enter German-English translations of Koranic verses a few years back. Pretty sure that someone (maybe me) discouraged this hobby.

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 - 2020 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