The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.
Press release (German) https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/amtliche-deutsche-rechtschreibung-ueberarbeitetes-regelwerk-und-neufassung-woerterverzeichnis-fuer-schule-und-verwaltung-verbindlich/
Report (148 pages, German) https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Bericht_2017-2023.pdf
Official ruleset (348 pages, German) https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Amtliches-Regelwerk_2024.pdf
El Tue, 09 Jul 2024 21:26:52 +0000, Christian Weisgerber escribió:
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about its
activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised official
ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.
I was reading the tales of the Grimm bros. in old German. I gave up. I've
had to find a modern version.
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
On 2024-07-09, Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
I should have mentioned: This has been agreed by the representatives
of the official bodies of
* Germany
* Austria
* Switzerland
* Bolzano-South Tyrol
* German-speaking Community of Belgium
* Liechtenstein
Luxembourg has non-voting representation.
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
Thanks for the series of posts, I hadn’t noticed the change. Nothing drastic to
it, as far as I can see.
On 2024-07-13, Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> wrote:
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
Thanks for the series of posts, I hadn’t noticed the change. Nothing drastic to
it, as far as I can see.
I just finished going through the report. Among other things, it
details the changes and provides rationales. Overall those are
just minor tweaks for some corner cases. There are also some purely editorial changes; the Council is proud to have condensed the
description of the comma rules and to have improved the overall
integration of ruleset and word list.
The report also contains some hints how the sausage is made. You
would think that orthography is a purely prescriptive endeavor, but
it turns out there is a large descriptive component. They monitor
the usage of professional writers (newspapers mostly) and are trying
to accommodate what people actually use if it can be formalized in
rules and doesn't interfere with other aspects of the orthography.
Also, assimilated spellings that fail to catch on (e.g. "Spagetti")
are dropped again.
The Austrians are running a project where they analyze secondary
school exit exams (Matura) for adherence to the standard orthography.
Two thirds of the mistakes are comma-related, one third are spelling mistakes. More than half of the latter relate to the capitalization
rules, the next largest group is closed versus open compounds. Water
is wet.
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Antonio Marques <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Certainly! I'd be happy to break down the German phrase "Vielen
Dank" grammatically for you. Let's analyze each component:
"Vielen"
- Part of speech: Adjective
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Plural
- Gender: Not specified (as it's plural)
- Meaning: "Many" or "Much"
"Vielen" is the declined form of the adjective "viel" (meaning
"much" or "many"). It's in the accusative case and plural form.
"Dank"
- Part of speech: Noun
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Singular
- Gender: Masculine
- Meaning: "Thanks" or "Gratitude"
"Dank" is a masculine noun meaning "thanks" or "gratitude."
It's in the accusative case.
The phrase "Vielen Dank" is a shortened version of a complete
sentence. In its full form, it would be:
"Ich sage Ihnen vielen Dank." (I give you many thanks.)
In this complete sentence:
- "Vielen" modifies "Dank"
- "Dank" is the direct object of the verb "sagen" (to say),
which is why it's in the accusative case
However, in everyday usage, Germans often omit the subject
and verb, leaving just the object phrase "Vielen Dank"
as a common expression of gratitude.
This phrase is used as a polite and somewhat formal way of
saying "Thank you very much" in German. It's more emphatic
than the simple "Danke" (thanks) and is appropriate in
many social and professional situations.
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
14 Jul 2024 11:20:54 GMT: ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
scribeva:
Antonio Marques <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Certainly! I'd be happy to break down the German phrase "Vielen
Dank" grammatically for you. Let's analyze each component:
"Vielen"
- Part of speech: Adjective
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Plural
Wrong. It's singular here.
It still sounds odd to me. Christian says Dank is to be read as a mass
noun, but I can't quite make that work.
If "Dank" was countable, we'd probably say *"Ich sagen Ihnen viele
Danke!" ("I'm giving you many thanks."), so not "vielen" either.
(Nowadays, "thanks" is considered a noun with no plural.)
Nobody knows why the formula "Vielen Dank!" got stuck and
is used instead of "Viel Dank!". And since we don't really
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
I'd never thought of _vielen_ as a singular, hence my request.
It still sounds odd to me. Christian says Dank is to be read as a mass
noun, but I can't quite make that work.
I'm also a bit puzzled that german children won't instinctively interpret vielen as a plural.
|viel/wenig Kummer in meinem Leben gehabt. (Aber nur:) Vielen Dank!
Grammatik
BTW: We had a thread
"vielen Dank" - wieso "vielen"?
in de.etc.sprache.deutsch in 2006, where I wrote ><dank-20061230181811@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>.
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.
15 Jul 2024 19:46:05 GMT: ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
scribeva:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.
Why? It's a singular masculin accusative!
So I rather thought it was a fossil form, possibly misanalyzed to the >mondegreen point, maybe even missing a syllable at the end, or /dank/ not >even being originally the noun form.
In 2009, Melanie Löber wondered, "Could 'viel' have been
inflected more in the past, so that "vielen Dank" represents
a fossilized form from earlier times?".
|Now one could assume that "viel" was possibly inflected more
|in the past and gradually lost its inflectional forms.
|According to our sources, however, the opposite is the case:
|both Hermann Paul's "Mittelhochdeutschen Grammatik" and the
|"Deutschen Wörterbuch" of the Grimm Brothers assume that
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
|from the following examples, this usage persisted well beyond
|Middle High German.
|
|Examples
|[...]
|
|However, why the inflected forms are used in certain
|constructions and the uninflected forms in others does not lie
|in German grammar itself, but in language use, i.e., all
|speakers and writers of German decide together which usage
|prevails. And in the case of "vielen Dank", they have evidently
|decided in favor of the inflected form of "viel" in deviation
|from the general rule.
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
The omission of the partitive is akin a bit to when the "of"
is dropped in "a couple friends." Compare that also to German:
"eine Art von Zahlwort" -> "eine Art Zahlwort".
Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:Can one still say 'viel Danks/Glücks', or would that be wrong outright?
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used asThe omission of the partitive is akin a bit to when the "of"
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
is dropped in "a couple friends." Compare that also to German:
"eine Art von Zahlwort" -> "eine Art Zahlwort".
Can one still say 'viel Danks/Glücks', or would that be wrong outright?
For me, it's not so much the genitive here as the absence of
an article that sounds wrong. "Ich wünsche viel des Glücks!",
with an article, would sound bizarre, but less wrong.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 495 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 42:57:28 |
| Calls: | 9,745 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 13,742 |
| Messages: | 6,183,984 |