Adjective Ending: Why 'faulen' in "Ihr faulen Kinder"?

Question

I'd be very grateful to anybody who could help me with the following question:

My question: Why is it "faulen" here? See text below:

Text:

Die Stiefmutter weckt Hänsel und Gretel: Ihr faulen Kinder! Steht auf. Wir wollen in den Wald gehen. Und Holz sammeln.

My (mis)understanding: the adjective 'faul' should be declined here according to the strong inflection table since there is no article in the sentence. The noun "Kinder" is nominative plural. So that means the ending should be just '-e': faule. But the text gives "faulen". It doesn't sound wrong – I just can't explain why it is "faulen". The 'ihr' here is also not a possessive determiner, but rather nominative personal pronoun (2nd person plural informal). What am I missing?

Would anyone be able to explain to me why it is 'faulen'? Thank you!

Text Source: "Hänsel und Gretel" translated into simple language by Franziska Baumgärtner & Annemarie Vogel. Märchen in Leichter Sprache. Norddeutscher Rundfunk. Link to text.

Answer 1

According to the Duden grammar (2009 ed., p. 962), there is simply variation in adjective forms after pronouns ("variation" is indeed the chapter heading). They state that usually the strong inflection of an adjective would be used in construction with a personal pronoun, but there are other cases as well. They explicitly mention that in a vocative phrase, "ihr" is predominantly followed by the weak inflection. Full stop. That is very specific isn't it. There is no hint as to a systematic reason in that text.

In my opinion, the whole area is not well understood, because it already seems unclear what kind of construction we are dealing with precisely. The traditional analysis (defended also in the Duden grammar) is that the adjective + noun in your example follow the pronoun in the same way as an "apposition" would follow a noun (I can't determine what kind of apposition, though, for this can refer to very different constructions). But alternatively, the personal pronoun could be treated like a determiner. Maybe we should not expect systematic and clear rules here.

Answer 2

the adjective 'faul' should be declined here according to the strong inflection table since there is no article in the sentence.

In fact, there is: "Ihr". Now, "Ihr" is not an article, but it acts as one here. The whole sentence is imperative form, so if we rephrase it without the "Ihr" you would be right:

Faule Kinder, geht hinaus!

but with the "ihr", it is correct as it is written.

Addendum:

As I have already written here grammar is post festum. Language is what is spoken/written and grammar only tries afterwards to identify patterns ("rules") to systematize what is already there.

It is true, I have no have no explanation for, as @JanusBahsJacquet put it in a comment:

The fact that "du" and "ihr" work differently with respect to adjective inflection is just bizarre.

No, it is not "bizarre", it is simply how it is and that grammar has no explanation for that is a shortcoming of grammar, not one of language. Just because physics can't explain some phenomena in nature doesn't mean nature is at fault, but simply that physics still has some work to do.

Neither, btw., has the Duden any explanation to offer. It only states that:

Schwache Formen erscheinen außerdem im Nominativ Plural nach ihr und wir; diese Pronomen verhalten sich hier also wie Artikelwörter
_{§1529, "Schwankungen nach Personalpronomen", p.962, Duden Die Grammatik, 8. Auflage}

It is prudent to ask what "verhalten sich wie Artikelwörter" means. Hold on one moment, while i activate my telephatic connection to the Duden authors ...