Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Extremely close to the original (but no idiomatic English): That, whoever says in the CDU leadership that the AfD is to be ignored, actually ignores them, too, is probably not even believed by those in the CDU who criticize their party leadership for that. If you turn this structure around somewhat, you arrive at Ingmar's translation.


1

Object structure It's weird, but the object is a relative clause, with everything between dass and diese as its subject. Dass, wer in der CDU-Führung sagt, (short for 'Dass der, der in der CDU-Führung sagt, ...') die AfD sei zu ignorieren, (infinitive group specifying 'sagt') diese auch tatsächlich nicht beachtet, ('beachtet' is the ...


1

What does "wer in der CDU-Führung sagt" mean? those members of the CDU leadership who say What does "diese" refer to? die "Alternative für Deutschland" (AfD) What does the part "Dass ... beachtet" mean? As hellcode already said: this is the wrong pair. The whole phrase between "Dass" and "glauben" is the object of the main clause - it is ...


3

It is not "Dass ... beachtet", but "Dass ... glauben". But the sentence is really hard to read even for native german speakers. Here is a try to reorder the sentence: Dass diejenigen in der CDU-Führung, die sagen, die "Alternative für Deutschland" (AfD) sei zu ignorieren, die AfD auch tatsächlich nicht beachten, glauben mutmaßlich selbst diejenigen in der ...


3

It's a complicated sentence. Freely translated, it means: Not even those members of the CDU who criticize their party leadership for ignoring the AfD are likely to believe that CDU leaders who say that the AfD must be ignored actually do not pay attention to it.


3

Generally family names should not be translated, as they are genuine names that stand as they are. However in case we must it depends whether we wanted to transtlate the meaning (Metzger > Butcher, Bäcker > Baker, Müller > Miller), or if we wanted to find a name that is being pronounced the same. The example name Würker offers both, as it likely derives ...


17

Your interpretation is not correct. The main problem is that "Und ob!" is a fixed idiom that means "You bet!" So the structure of the passage in question is: Will man das wirklich? - "Und ob!", sagen vier Jungbauern. Do you really want that? - "You bet!" four junior farmers say. What follows (... die sich ... entschieden haben.) is just a normal ...


1

Steak/XSteak sind 2 Programme, eines für die Kommandozeile, eines graphisch, die beide auf die gleiche Datenbasis zugreifen. Sie stehen unter einer Open-Source-Lizenz und sind bei FreeCode (vormals Freshmeat) zu finden.


1

The phrase could be translated as: And as paradoxical as it might appear in the face of horrible recent news: ... "Mag" is a conjugated form of "mögen", a modal verb (that can also be used as a main verb). As you can see from its entry in the Duden it can be used to express quite a few different things. I prefer the summary they give at Canoo: The ...


4

For my understanding as a German native speaker the mögen in Es mag paradox anmuten... has two purposes at the same time: It implies an uncertainty about the rest: Maybe it seems to be paradoxical to you but it need not seem paradoxical to everyone. EDIT: As some have noted in the comments, instead of uncertainty the phrase could communicate irrelevance: ...


0

"mag" is a modal (mögen); it is ethymologically the same as "may", yet be careful, as both languages use it quite differently. I'll try a (somewhat free) translation: "As strange as it may seem in the face of current, brutal events: during the course of past milennia, Earth became a more peaceful place" Note that "may" must not be used to denote permission: ...


2

Although this question has been answered well enough, I'd like to add a little story, which is exactly about the topic: Some 14 years ago, a girl which I was very interested in, wrote me Ich hab dich lieb! in a SMS message. I interpreted that as the confession, that she loves me and I wrote back some happy answer, which resulted in confusion, since she only ...


3

You’re right, “o.g.” means “obengenannte”, i.e. “abovementioned”. Full translation is The prospective tenant certifies that the abovementioned, previously unknown to him, rentable apartment, was pointed out to him by the broker, and that he has received complete data. “o.g.” is in the correct spot, as it refers to the entire phrase “ihm unbekannte ...


7

You are right about the meaning of o. g.: It stands for obengenannte (or any inflected form) which translates as abovementioned. So the relevant segment of in your is: obengenannte ihm unbekannte vermietbare Wohnung. This is the noun Wohnung (appartment) which is described by three adjectives: obengenannte (abovementioned) ihm unbekannte (unknown to ...


4

I often use the modal 'ja' as a way to suggest to the other that there is an agreement between us on the topic I'm talking about, or on a premise to a conclusion I'm drawing. The emotional quality of the 'ja' is defined by exactly what that topic/conclusion is. It always introduces a degree of emotion or at least subjectivity into a sentence otherwise ...


1

"ja" is normally a positive reaction to a question as "yes". But in German "ja" has a lot of other uses, not possible with English yes. Examples: Das ist ja nicht wahr!- Das ist ja gelogen! - Das ist ja falsch! Formerly such words were called Füllwörter, filling words, but that's rather a stopgap, it doesn't help a learner in any way. Today one uses terms ...


1

It might have been a "bis-Strich" (I don't know the English term for that). In that case it was probably typeset not as a hyphen (-) but as an en-dash (–). If that is the case, "gestern–heute" would mean "gestern bis heute", "from yesterday to today". Generally, the "bis-Strich" is used to denote ranges, like "von 3–5 Uhr" (from 3 to 5 o'clock), or "Seite ...


1

from yesterday to today (timespan); maybe what has changed, how was it back then, and how is it now (the situation)


16

I guess the “-” in “gestern-heute” is not meant as a hyphen, but rather as a dash. So it should be written “gestern – heute”. Both words are used here in a figurative sense, representing past and present. So I would expect the article to contrast past and present aspects of the 9/11 attack. A word gestern-heute or gesternheute doesn’t exist, as Grantwalzer ...


3

It's probably not supposed to be one word, because gesternheute seems contradictory (an antinomy), except maybe in the sense of "either yesterday and/or today" (and then it would be my first encounter with it). Meaning: As things are standing it doesn't have some acknowledged meaning. You can still interpret meaning into it, like you can into ...


7

It's a modal particle. (→English) Unlike "normal" adverbs (gut können), modal particles don't directly describe the verb (ja können?), but the speaker's relation to the action. Among other things, they can describe expectations/assumptions, as ja does here. In this context, it modifies the verb können somewhat like this: Alright, then it is ...


5

Addition to the given answer: "was" as abbreviation for "etwas" is mainly colloquially used. See also http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/etwas. In professional writing you should better avoid it (citations and direct speech excluded), if not the overall writing style is colloquial and thus "demands" it.


8

Was is short for etwas (something) here and is the required object for abarbeiten. Thus the sentence means Now I can finally work some things off. or more freely: Now I can finally get some work done.


4

In this example, was is an abbreviation of etwas. So it's a normal object, not a modal particle.



Top 50 recent answers are included