Timeline for What is the difference between “in” and “im”?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 19, 2014 at 11:46 | history | edited | Takkat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 176 characters in body
|
| May 19, 2014 at 11:29 | comment | added | Emanuel | @Vogel612.. the first group is called "contraction"... well, we cannot "uncontract" my examples and say "in dem Endeffekt", can we? So they do not belong in that group. But they don't belong in group 2 either. So they must be extra. But why are they extra while group 2 is.. well.. a group? Thee are not all that many members in group 2. It just doesn't make sense to group it that way. Two group, "separable", "fixed"... I would be okay with that. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 11:21 | comment | added | Vogel612 | @Emanuel sorry, but do your examples not fit into the first category?? I fail to understand the point you want to make with these examples :( | |
| May 19, 2014 at 11:20 | comment | added | Emanuel | @Takkat... no offense but did you read my comment? I did acknowledge that there are "ims" that cannot be separated. I even mentioned examples. My problem is that they have little to do with the whole "in course of"-idea and I do not understand why this is a second meaning while all the others are not. As for a source... Leo, Pons, DWDS, Wiktionary | |
| May 19, 2014 at 11:13 | comment | added | Takkat | @Emanuel: you are wrong there. There are usages when we can not separate im to in dem without producing a semantically wrong sentence. See my example where the meaning changes, and also have a look at the examples from Duden. BTW the dispute here shows once more that this is a good question which should not be closed. In case you have a better ressource than Duden telling something different you should write an answer rather than writing an unconstructive rant about Duden here. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 9:41 | comment | added | Emanuel | Oh Duden... what about "im Lichte" , "im Prinzip", "im Endeffekt", "im Großen und Ganzen"... I think dividing "im" into 2 meanings is just plain stupid because it is arbitrary. I strongly suggest you limit your answer what it should be... "im is a contraction of in+dem" or, if you want to do the non-separable ones justice, just say that there are fixed expressions of VARIOUS sorts that use "im".. ps: - 1 for using the (always disappointing) Duden online dictionary. If it didn't have the name people would see it for what it is. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 8:13 | comment | added | Carsten S | Anyway, +1 for a complete answer including a link to a (gasp!) dictionary. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:47 | comment | added | Carsten S | Second, while the Duden is right to point out the special usage (2), I think that it is grammatically not really distinct from (1), in the same way that the English in in (2) is not different from (1). Nominalisations are male or neuter, so im is expected in the dative case. Die Konferenz ist in Gang gekommen, nun ist sie im Gang. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:39 | comment | added | Carsten S | First, I think that your example is not optimal, because the expression has become fixed and „die Konferenz geht“ would not be a possible replacement. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:36 | history | edited | Takkat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| May 19, 2014 at 7:30 | comment | added | Takkat | @CarstenSchultz: I linked to the Duden entry where the difference is explained. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:29 | history | edited | Takkat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| May 19, 2014 at 7:29 | comment | added | Vogel612 | *confused* the sentence may be ambiguous in itself, but the translation is correct, as well as the meaning. why would the noun be special in the first place @CarstenSchultz ? | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:25 | comment | added | Carsten S | There is nothing special about the noun Gang in the second case. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:22 | comment | added | Vogel612 | @CarstenSchultz definitely not... Also you would have gotten some upvotes. at least mine .. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 7:21 | comment | added | Carsten S | Your second im is the same as the first. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 6:45 | history | answered | Takkat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |