some more grammer issues
kza
Hi. First of all sorry that my examples seem a little violent, crude or
offensive, its precisly the reason that I can't find these examples in a
text book, or take them to a teacher, that I am asking them here.
I am having trouble with the pattern "let me (some verb) myself".
e.g.
"Let me shoot myself." My german friends tell me "lass mich mich
erschiessen" is wrong. But noone can tell me the right way to say it.
Another example, Let me masturbate myself. They tell me "Lass mich mich
masturbiern" is wrong. They suggested "Lass mich masturbiern" but I
want to emphasise that it is myself I am masturbating, and not someone
else.
Why is "Lass mich dich masturbiern" ok, but "Lass mich mich masturbiern"
wrong?
Can the words "selbst" or "selber" help here?
What is the difference between "selbst" and selber"?
Also, how do we say "Go fuck yourself bitch" in german. The exact
wording isnt important, just the harshness and sense of dislike do I
want to convey.
Its mostly for the ladies in the supermarket that hate foreigners and
pretend not to understand. Just now I said "Ein stück himbeerschnitte
bitte" And I had to say himbeerschnitte about 5 times, I said it
perfectly but the bitches had to give me hassle and then whisper to each
other some degrading anti-foreigner comments. It happens every day.
The worst thing is that I didnt have any hurtful answer-back to offer.
Thanks
Kurt
Joachim Pense
>
> "Let me shoot myself." My german friends tell me "lass mich mich
> erschiessen" is wrong. But noone can tell me the right way to say it.
not wrong, only bad style because of the "mich mich". The best way would
be a total reformulation.
>
> Another example, Let me masturbate myself. They tell me "Lass mich
> mich masturbiern" is wrong. They suggested "Lass mich masturbiern"
> but I want to emphasise that it is myself I am masturbating, and not
> someone else.
>
> Why is "Lass mich dich masturbiern" ok, but "Lass mich mich
> masturbiern" wrong?
"Masturbieren" includes "mich" already. So "I masturbate myself" = "Ich
masturbiere", "I masturbate you" - ich masturbiere dich (I am not sure
if that is really used). I always thought, "I masturbate" (w/o "myself")
is perfectly ok in English, too.
>
> Can the words "selbst" or "selber" help here?
>
> What is the difference between "selbst" and selber"?
"selber" is low-level colloquial style.
>
> Also, how do we say "Go fuck yourself bitch" in german. The exact
> wording isnt important, just the harshness and sense of dislike do I
> want to convey.
Influenced by English, today you can just say: "Fick dich selber!". More
idiomatical would be "Fick dich ins Knie".
>
> Its mostly for the ladies in the supermarket that hate foreigners and
> pretend not to understand. Just now I said "Ein stück himbeerschnitte
"Himbeerschnitte" with a capital "H".
> bitte" And I had to say himbeerschnitte about 5 times, I said it
> perfectly but the bitches had to give me hassle and then whisper to
> each other some degrading anti-foreigner comments. It happens every
> day.
>
> The worst thing is that I didnt have any hurtful answer-back to offer.
If they do not understand you again, just say "Lern erst mal Deutsch,
Tuss". This will hurt them, in particular if they speak dialect.
Joachim
Joachim Pense
> kza <k...@cratos.ath.cx>:
>> Its mostly for the ladies in the supermarket that hate foreigners and
>> pretend not to understand. Just now I said "Ein stück himbeerschnitte
>
> "Himbeerschnitte" with a capital "H".
And of course "Stück", too.
Joachim
WMS
As a German I know how arrogant and dumb Germans can be. Just ignore them or
ask for a supervisor (Vorgesetzter, Abteilungsleiter). If they don't know
how to treat customers right, they might learn it pretty soon after getting
in trouble because of their misbehavior.
By the way, I am glad not to live in Germany anymore. Their mentallity is
just embarrassing!
Mike
kza
> Why would you put yourself on such a low level?
Thats the thing, I don't consider it a low level, I come from somewhere
where conflicts are resolved in a physical way, such as pushing ones
finger into the chest of the other party to emphasise a point, I realise
this is legally dangerous here in germany, so I compromise and make full
use of my impassioned and spirited verbal style of conflict resolution.
But I have never seen germans even raise their voices against each
other, this at first seems civilised, but bottling it up inside is not
healthy. How do germans resolve low level conflicts like this anyway?
> As a German I know how arrogant and dumb Germans can be. Just ignore them or
> ask for a supervisor (Vorgesetzter, Abteilungsleiter). If they don't know
> how to treat customers right, they might learn it pretty soon after getting
> in trouble because of their misbehavior.
Well involving some higher authority is something I have always felt
unneccessary. In a lot of modern countries, for example, a laborer
might build a bridge wrong and it collapses and kills people, but he
wont get fired, instead the minister of public works loses his job or
something.
I dont consider a problem of this nature serious enough to involve
management. After all, did she really misbehave? Is there such a thing
as misbehaviour? Or is there merely behaviour, and responses to
behaviour?
> By the way, I am glad not to live in Germany anymore. Their mentallity is
> just embarrassing!
They are cool most of the time.
WMS
<management. After all, did she really misbehave? Is there such a thing
<as misbehaviour? Or is there merely behaviour, and responses to
<behaviour?
But is seems to be serious enough to call her a bitch.
<Thats the thing, I don't consider it a low level, I come from somewhere
<where conflicts are resolved in a physical way, such as pushing ones
<finger into the chest of the other party to emphasise a point,
That figures. Maybe you should post your questions in a more redneck-like or
hooligan group.
I don't want to know where you come from, and I really don't care. But your
postings show a certain level which I consider very low. To 'resolve
conflicts in a physical way' due to poor or lack of conversational skills is
something I most certainly understand. It seems to be the only way for you
to react because you don't know any better. But isn't it kind of
embarrassing to get lectured in your own language by a non-native English
speaker?
kza
><I dont consider a problem of this nature serious enough to involve
><management. After all, did she really misbehave? Is there such a thing
><as misbehaviour? Or is there merely behaviour, and responses to
><behaviour?
>
> But is seems to be serious enough to call her a bitch.
Its annoying enough to call her a bitch, but in no way would I call it
serious.
><Thats the thing, I don't consider it a low level, I come from somewhere
><where conflicts are resolved in a physical way, such as pushing ones
><finger into the chest of the other party to emphasise a point,
>
> That figures. Maybe you should post your questions in a more redneck-like or
> hooligan group.
Rednecks or hooligans tend not to care about other cultures or
communicating with them, so are unlikely to be of any help.
> I don't want to know where you come from, and I really don't care. But your
> postings show a certain level which I consider very low.
Yeah, if I get judged on your standards I guess. But that would be as
about as appropriate as me judging your culture on our standards.
We happen to be a physical people, and communicating with physical
contact has been normal for us, I realise its not that way here in
germany, and I have already suppressed my tendency to touch others during
conversation.
> To 'resolve
> conflicts in a physical way' due to poor or lack of conversational skills is
> something I most certainly understand. It seems to be the only way for you
> to react because you don't know any better.
Exactly. Here in Germany, my
conversational skills are about as poor as it gets :) Hence I come to
the newsgroup to find appropriate verbal responses.
> But isn't it kind of
> embarrassing to get lectured in your own language by a non-native English
> speaker?
I don't know if it has ever really happened, most people are polite to
the extreme that they fail to get their message across. I am sure that
people have tried to lecture me in german on occasion, but the subtlety
and tone would have been way over my head to have the desired affect.
The old saying appears especially true, when there is a language
barrier. "Its not what you say, its how you say it".
Laura E. Czeschick
> WMS schrieb im Artikel <aju15p$7sd$1...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu>:
>> <I dont consider a problem of this nature serious enough to involve
>> <management. After all, did she really misbehave? Is there such a
>> thing <as misbehaviour? Or is there merely behaviour, and responses
>> to <behaviour?
There are different registers of behavior as well as different registers of
language. So as long as there's a choice there's the prossibility to make
the wrong choice.
>> But is seems to be serious enough to call her a bitch.
>
> Its annoying enough to call her a bitch, but in no way would I call it
> serious.
Here it's regarded as seriously offensive to be called a bitch, if you
please.
"Desired affect." I guess this "typo" reveils your problem very nicely.
> The old saying appears especially true, when there is a language
> barrier. "Its not what you say, its how you say it".
True, true. As you seem to realize this yourself, there's still some hope.
Did it ever occur to you to ask for your Himbeerschnitten or whatever with a
smile? (A non-nasty one, if possible.) It would save you learning some
outrageous vocabulary the usage of which definitely will not win you friends
nor understanding.
Regards---Laura
Dirk Thierbach
> I am having trouble with the pattern "let me (some verb) myself".
I think you cannot translate this pattern literally.
> "Let me shoot myself."
I must admit I do not understand what that is supposed to mean.
If it's supposed to be some sort of witty remark, in the sense of
"Leave me alone, all this is getting on my nerves, so why don't I
just shoot myself?" I guess you could say something like
"Na gut, dann erschiess' ich mich halt". But that's not really funny
or witty.
> Its mostly for the ladies in the supermarket that hate foreigners and
> pretend not to understand.
If it helps you, the same happens to me when I am in a foreign country.
There are situations when you just feel stupid and seem to say something
wrong, because people are looking in that special way at you, and whisper
to each other, and so on.
There's probably nothing you can do about that. Ignore it; it's part
of the experience of being abroad. And remember it when you're back
home and a foreigner talks to you and says something incomprehensible :-)
> Just now I said "Ein stück himbeerschnitte bitte" And I had to say
> himbeerschnitte about 5 times, I said it perfectly
You probably didn't :-) It's easy to make slight pronounciation errors
which you won't notice as a foreigner, but which make the word very
hard to understand to a native speaker. Again, the same happens to
me from time to time when I speak english.
> but the bitches had to give me hassle and then whisper to each
> other some degrading anti-foreigner comments. It happens every day.
> The worst thing is that I didnt have any hurtful answer-back to offer.
Don't do that. It might make you feel a bit better, but there's
nothing gained in making everybody angry. The best way is probably to
be straight and just ask them if you pronounce it the wrong way, and
how you should pronounce it correctly. Smiling also helps :-)
- Dirk
kza
>> "Let me shoot myself."
>
> I must admit I do not understand what that is supposed to mean.
> If it's supposed to be some sort of witty remark, in the sense of
> "Leave me alone, all this is getting on my nerves, so why don't I
> just shoot myself?" I guess you could say something like
> "Na gut, dann erschiess' ich mich halt". But that's not really funny
> or witty.
No, it wouldnt be used in a witty context. This issue came up when I
was attempting to translate a movie scene, where one person was trying
to shoot himself with a gun (i.e. commit suicide) and the other person
was trying to stop him. The first person says "Let me shoot myself". I
translated this as "Lass mich mich erschiessen". But apparently thats
wrong, so I still want to know how this is said in German.
kza
> There are different registers of behavior as well as different registers of
> language. So as long as there's a choice there's the prossibility to make
> the wrong choice.
Yeah. So what choice would a german make in a german context?
> Here it's regarded as seriously offensive to be called a bitch, if you
> please.
As it is in most parts of the world! This was the intention.
>> desired affect.
>
> "Desired affect." I guess this "typo" reveils your problem very nicely.
I guess you meant to write "reveals", but I wont hold it against you,
after all, this is usenet, where english is more relaxed and flexible.
See, I didnt need to put any apostrophes at all in that sentance, and it
still looks normal. Affect and effect sound the same, mean the same,
and can be used interchangeably, outside of the most formal of contexts.
After all, its an evolving language, otherwise thee would still be
writing in middle english, wouldnt thee? :)
Heck, one day reveils might even be a word.
Andy
<k...@cratos.ath.cx> wrote
[
> Affect and effect sound the same, mean the same,
>and can be used interchangeably, outside of the most formal of contexts.
No they don't; no they don't; no they can't. Not in British English,
that is.
"Sound affects" is meaningless unless you treat 'affects' as a verb and
say what it affects; "sound effects" are noises off. "My liver is
affected" is a medical problem, while "my liver is effected" is
nonsense. Indeed, my dictionary explicitly warns under the verb 'to
affect', "often confused with 'effect', which as a verb means 'bring
about, accomplish'.".
--
Andy [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society]
For Austrian philately <URL:http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/austamps>
For Lupus <URL:http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/lupus>
For my other interests <URL:http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>
Grant Uren
"kza" <k...@cratos.ath.cx> wrote in message
> I guess you meant to write "reveals", but I wont hold it against you,
> after all, this is usenet, where english is more relaxed and flexible.
> See, I didnt need to put any apostrophes at all in that sentance, and it
> still looks normal. Affect and effect sound the same, mean the same,
> and can be used interchangeably, outside of the most formal of contexts.
> After all, its an evolving language, otherwise thee would still be
> writing in middle english, wouldnt thee? :)
>
> Heck, one day reveils might even be a word.
I thought I'd just say that first part doesn't look right, it might sound
right, but that's while saying it to yourself.
Affect and Effect do not mean the same. Effect is the noun, Affect is the
verb. This brings me to translating. In German they do not sound the
same, therefore someone who translates from English using the wrong one has
almost stuffed the sentence.
The worse thing about apostrophies is when people use them with plurals.
Not sadly, you'RE right, language is always evolving. The sad part is; it
follows how the commoners speak and write.
(to myself)
like spelling colour and nieghbour without "u"s, puh..lease
Daryl
k...@cratos.ath.cx
>
> "kza" <k...@cratos.ath.cx> wrote in message
> verb. This brings me to translating. In German they do not sound the
> same, therefore someone who translates from English using the wrong one has
> almost stuffed the sentence.
Affect and Effect, both refer to the result on something, of having
something done to it. That is the central concept of both words. One
spelling is merely the verb form and the other spelling is merely the
noun form. The actual meaning, or semantic brain vibe, is the same, I
suspect, the spellings used to be the same, and perhaps differed when
some early grammar expert, noticed the word being used in both as a verb
and a noun, and decided to experiment with prefix based declination.
> The worse thing about apostrophies is when people use them with plurals.
True.
> Not sadly, you'RE right, language is always evolving. The sad part is; it
> follows how the commoners speak and write.
Aha! You have given yourself away, your one of those snobs that
pronounce their bear, beer and bare all differently arent you?. Who
else calls people commoners.
> (to myself)
> like spelling colour and nieghbour without "u"s, puh..lease
Thats the future of english, more books are printed in american than in
british english, democracy at work!
How do you decide, how far to go back, before you get pure english?
Whatever it is, its just a corruption of everything that came before it,
till we go all the way back to stone age grunts.
Andy
wrote
>In article <fbka9.15267$g9.4...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>, Grant Uren wrote:
>>
>> "kza" <k...@cratos.ath.cx> wrote in message
>> Affect and Effect do not mean the same. Effect is the noun, Affect is the
>> verb. This brings me to translating. In German they do not sound the
>> same, therefore someone who translates from English using the wrong one has
>> almost stuffed the sentence.
>
>Affect and Effect, both refer to the result on something, of having
>something done to it. That is the central concept of both words. One
>spelling is merely the verb form and the other spelling is merely the
>noun form. The actual meaning, or semantic brain vibe, is the same, I
>suspect, the spellings used to be the same, and perhaps differed when
>some early grammar expert, noticed the word being used in both as a verb
>and a noun, and decided to experiment with prefix based declination.
Oh dear oh dear! A quick look in the Concise Oxford Dictionary reveals
that there are five words for you to be confused over:
affect(1): transitive verb. produce an effect on; touch the feelings of.
**Often confused with 'effect', which as a verb means 'bring about,
accomplish'.** From Latin 'afficere'
affect(2): transitive verb. pretend to feel; assume the character of;
make a show of liking. **Often confused with 'effect', which as a verb
means 'bring about, accomplish'.** From Latin 'affectare'
affect: noun. A feeling, emotion, or desire, especially as leading to
action. From Latin 'affectus'
effect: transitive verb. bring about; accomplish; cause to exist. From
Latin 'ex-facere'
effect: noun. the result or consequence of an action; an impression
produced on a spectator; property; a physical phenomenon. From Latin
'effectus'
The effect of your affectation of indifference to the difference between
'affect' and 'effect affects me effectively.
[
>Aha! You have given yourself away, your one of those snobs that
>pronounce their bear, beer and bare all differently arent you?. Who
>else calls people commoners.
>
The bare bear drank its beer...
Paul Schmitz-Josten
<GWEfgWAc...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>:
(about Affect and Effect)
>A quick look in the Concise Oxford Dictionary [...]
Would you please consider to move to a more suitable group concerning the
_english_ language?
Thanks in advance,
Paul
Sebastian Koppehel
> kza <k...@cratos.ath.cx>:
>
>> Why is "Lass mich dich masturbiern" ok, but "Lass mich mich
>> masturbiern" wrong?
>
> "Masturbieren" includes "mich" already.
Yes, because you can't masturbate someone else, because in that case
it wouldn't be masturbation anyomore by definition. However, that is
the meaning of the German verb "masturbieren". The English verb "to
masturbate", however, according to the DCE, means "to excite the sex
organs (of) by handling, rubbing, etc.", and, consequently, can be
used transitively as well as intransitively.
> If they do not understand you again, just say "Lern erst mal Deutsch,
> Tuss". This will hurt them, in particular if they speak dialect.
But if there was indeed something wrong with his pronunciation of the
word "Himbeerschnitte" and possibly other words, it will hardly have
that effect ...
- Sebastian
Andy
<alos...@web.de> wrote
coarser, points of the German language, then it is on-topic to observe
[and if needed to explain in detail] essential features of the language
he wishes to hold the discussion in.
Herman the Hermit
> No, it wouldnt be used in a witty context. This issue came up when I
> was attempting to translate a movie scene, where one person was trying
> to shoot himself with a gun (i.e. commit suicide) and the other person
> was trying to stop him. The first person says "Let me shoot myself". I
> translated this as "Lass mich mich erschiessen". But apparently thats
> wrong, so I still want to know how this is said in German.
It's not wrong but just awkward, because of the repeated "mich".
"Lass mich! Ich erschieße mich!" or "Lass mich! Ich möchte mich
erschießen!", seem to be better (albeit longer) translations. (It
depends on the exact context.)
Ciao,
Herman
Herman the Hermit
> (about Affect and Effect)
> >A quick look in the Concise Oxford Dictionary [...]
>
> Would you please consider to move to a more suitable group concerning the
> _english_ language?
*sigh* Why do I get the hunch that you are a teacher?
Ciao,
Herman
chgodude0827
> >_english_ language?
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
Na, da haben wir 'nen 'Net Nazi' hier!
Paul Schmitz-Josten
<FnVa9.37996$Ke2.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>:
>Na, da haben wir 'nen 'Net Nazi' hier!
Learn about Godwin! Get a name! Get a life!
*PLONK*
Paul Schmitz-Josten
<y4CyLjAGE9a9EwJ$@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>:
>>Would you please consider to move to a more suitable group concerning the
>>_english_ language?
>It seems to me that if "kza" wishes to discuss the finer, or even the
>coarser, points of the German language, then it is on-topic to observe
>[and if needed to explain in detail] essential features of the language
>he wishes to hold the discussion in.
I disagree. The discussion language is a tool like the newsreaders,
the computers, the internet connections. None of them is on-topic here.
Ciao,
Paul
Andy
<alos...@web.de> wrote
[
>I disagree.
That is your right and privilege
>The discussion language is a tool like the newsreaders,
>the computers, the internet connections. None of them is on-topic here.
>
Mais naturellement!
Florian v. Savigny
Herman the Hermit <black_hol...@gmx.de> writes:
> kza <k...@cratos.ath.cx> wrote:
>
> > No, it wouldnt be used in a witty context. This issue came up when I
> > was attempting to translate a movie scene, where one person was trying
> > to shoot himself with a gun (i.e. commit suicide) and the other person
> > was trying to stop him. The first person says "Let me shoot myself". I
> > translated this as "Lass mich mich erschiessen". But apparently thats
> > wrong, so I still want to know how this is said in German.
>
> It's not wrong but just awkward, because of the repeated "mich".
I am just wondering *why* it is awkward, because other sentences with a
double "mich" would sound perfectly OK, such as
"Laß mich mich in Ruhe vorbereiten".
"Laß mich mich im Spiegel anschauen".
I think that "Laß mich mich ..." conjures up a situation where someone
is hindered by someone else to do something; the two may, for
instance, be struggling children. However, the situation is not
serious, nor is the thing the one person wants to do especially
important. He or she just wants to casually do it before he accepts
doing something else (that is on the agenda).
Thus, I think that "Lass mich mich erschiessen" would sound like "Lass
mich mich eben gerade mal (für einen kurzen Moment) erschiessen" and
might continue " ... dann können wir ins Kino gehen." It would be the
kind of humour found in films like Pulp Fiction.
If the situation is serious, I think Herman's proposals are
adequate. However, considering that this is not an everyday dialogue,
and the suicidal person may be quite out of himself; I'd think that
anything might be said. It might well be what he thinks at that
moment, without any consideration of a possibly ridiculous effect.
--
Florian v. Savigny
Germany
<To reply, remove the letters resembling a bath tub; finally, change
the word order behind the last dot to comply with the country name
indicated here.>
k...@cratos.ath.cx
> "Lass mich! Ich erschieße mich!" or "Lass mich! Ich möchte mich
> erschießen!", seem to be better (albeit longer) translations. (It
> depends on the exact context.)
Can we put a word like selbst or selber in there somewhere?
"Lass mich selbst erschiessen". or something? I still don't really know
how these selber and selbst words are used. They don't really translate
to "self" in english do they?
But to me, who has only 2 weeks of german course, and the rest learnt
off the internet, "Lass mich mich erschiessen" sounds good and rolls
easily off the tounged, compared to say, when der, das or die is
repeated.
Like "Der der Fred gennant wird"
and "Ich mag nur das das in einen Papierbeutel kommt"
Now that sounds awkward and doesnt roll easily off the tounge, or do
german speakers used to it think its ok?
Thanks a lot, I learn more from these discussions than any other source.
Watching TV is second after this newsgroup, followed, in order, by
reading books, talking to friends, and asking my german teacher.
I am in agreement, regarding dropping the discussion of the english
language from this thread.
Kza
Herman the Hermit
> > "Lass mich! Ich erschieße mich!" or "Lass mich! Ich möchte mich
> > erschießen!", seem to be better (albeit longer) translations. (It
> > depends on the exact context.)
>
> Can we put a word like selbst or selber in there somewhere?
Sure, if you want to emphasise that he prefers to shoot himself
rather than be shot by the other guy.
> But to me, who has only 2 weeks of german course, and the rest learnt
> off the internet, "Lass mich mich erschiessen" sounds good and rolls
> easily off the tounged, compared to say, when der, das or die is
> repeated.
Please yourself & your tongue - but now I can virtually _hear_
you pronounce "mich" as in "mick" ;-)
Ciao,
Herman
Dirk Thierbach
> In article <akgsp6$1j0vjk$1...@ID-54361.news.dfncis.de>, Herman the Hermit wrote:
>> "Lass mich! Ich erschieße mich!" or "Lass mich! Ich möchte mich
>> erschießen!", seem to be better (albeit longer) translations. (It
>> depends on the exact context.)
I agree.
> Can we put a word like selbst or selber in there somewhere?
Maybe, but that will make it just more awkward.
> "Lass mich selbst erschiessen". or something?
No, that's wrong. "Lass mich mich selbst erschiessen" would be correct,
but still awkward.
> I still don't really know how these selber and selbst words are
> used. They don't really translate to "self" in english do they?
As a native speaker, I don't know enough "theory" to answer this. But
"selbst" can be used to emphasize a pronoun, like in "Damit schadest
Du Dir nur selbst" = "That will only harm you (and especially you)". The
pronoun need not be present, like in "Ich moechte es selbst tun" = "I
want to do it myself" or "... on my own". "Selbst" kann also be part
of a word, like in "selbstverstaendlich" = "of course".
Maybe the rule is that "myself", "yourself" etc. corresponds to "selbst".
"Selber" is colloquial. For example, kids use it when shouting at
each other:
"Du bist doof!" = "You're stupid!"
"Selber!" = "(You're stupid) yourself"!
You shouldn't use "selber" normally. Correct would be "Du bist selbst
doof", but for some reason kids don't say that :-)
> But to me, who has only 2 weeks of german course, and the rest learnt
> off the internet, "Lass mich mich erschiessen" sounds good and rolls
> easily off the tounged, compared to say, when der, das or die is
> repeated.
> Like "Der der Fred gennant wird"
> and "Ich mag nur das das in einen Papierbeutel kommt"
Correct would be "Der, der Fred genannt wird" and "Ich mag nur das,
was in einen Papierbeutel kommt" (or maybe you mean "aus einem
Papierbeutel" ?).
Here the repition sounds ok to me (as a native speaker), because
there's a comma between the words, even though you don't hear that
when talking fast.
- Dirk
Dirk Thierbach
> I am just wondering *why* it is awkward, because other sentences with a
> double "mich" would sound perfectly OK, such as
> "Laß mich mich in Ruhe vorbereiten".
> "Laß mich mich im Spiegel anschauen".
I think that these also sound awkward. I'd probably replace "Lass mich"
by something like "Ich moechte" etc., depending on the situation.
- Dirk
k...@cratos.ath.cx
> Please yourself & your tongue - but now I can virtually _hear_
> you pronounce "mich" as in "mick" ;-)
Hehe, that was never a problem for me, even before I started learning
German, Austrian and Bavarian people told me, that if I can't say it
right, then saying mi or mih is preferable to mick. Which I did at the
start, but now I can say my ch sound ok.
I think.
Grant Uren
> Aha! You have given yourself away, your one of those snobs that
> pronounce their bear, beer and bare all differently arent you?. Who
> else calls people commoners.
I'm sorry this isn't about German grammar...
I'm Australian,
I pronounce bear and bare the same - as if to say 'air' with a 'b' on the
front
(saying 'air' to myself with my American accent)
I pronounce beer as 'ear' with a 'b' on it.
(oh no, they sound the same in one of my American accents)
the only way i can get all three to sound the same is with a very southern
(not Spanish) American voice.
"hey cletis, thArrs a bArr bArr drinking bArr."
Florian v. Savigny
Dirk Thierbach <dthie...@gmx.de> writes:
Well, I mean they do not sound awkward when spoken in a casual
context, or more precisely, I assume that you do hear them in those
contexts. I agree completely that they wouldn't be considered good
style and would not be written, nor would they be used orally in only
slightly official occasions. But I think in personal, pragmatic
communication (such as between a couple, or between two siblings) they
are not awkward.
Florian v. Savigny
Herman the Hermit <black_hol...@gmx.de> writes:
> k...@cratos.ath.cx wrote:
>
> > > "Lass mich! Ich erschieße mich!" or "Lass mich! Ich möchte mich
> > > erschießen!", seem to be better (albeit longer) translations. (It
> > > depends on the exact context.)
> >
> > Can we put a word like selbst or selber in there somewhere?
>
> Sure, if you want to emphasise that he prefers to shoot himself
> rather than be shot by the other guy.
In this context, I'd almost say "and only if"! If the other guy
shooting him is out of the question, this formulation will sound
absurd.
I think k...@cratos.ath.cx is misled by the use of "myself" in English
into thinking that it always translates into "selbst" or "selber",
which is wrong. There's a thread running on that topic here.
> Please yourself & your tongue - but now I can virtually _hear_
> you pronounce "mich" as in "mick" ;-)
Don't discourage learners.
Florian v. Savigny
See also the discussion in the thread "Question about reflexive verb",
which is precisely dealing with "selbst".
One remark about "selber": I agree it is inferior to "selbst", but I'd
say its use is quite widespread, and it's also more fun to use (I mean
that - it's more expressive). Furthermore, it helps in the distinction
of the two meanings of "selbst": it is synonymous to one of them,
while "sogar" is synonymous to the other one.