German [verb is 2nd] rule.

[Hen Hanna]

Und Jesus sprach zu ihm: Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.


[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.


My question is : Is the following word-order common ?

[Object] ich gab ihm gestern.

[Object] ich ass super.


If not common, was it used in famous old poems?

HH

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Hen Hanna
Und Jesus sprach zu ihm: Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.
[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.

And verily, I say unto you ...

Post by Hen Hanna
My question is : Is the following word-order common ?
[Object] ich gab ihm gestern.

Eine gute Note gab ich ihm gestern, heute ist es leider eine weniger gute.
The word order is common in certain phrases, in others not. Language is
most flexible. Almost anything can be right, but also wrong, or wright
and rong at the same time.

Post by Hen Hanna
[Object] ich ass super.
If not common, was it used in famous old poems?

That's not only uncommon but also weird. Common might be: Gestern ass ich
super Fisch; rather modern slang, not occurring in old poems.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Hen Hanna
Und Jesus sprach zu ihm: Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.
[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.

That's an interesting issue.
A good number of European languages have a distinction between plain adverbs and sentence adverbs. Here, wahrlich is a sentence in itself, it's not part of the next sentence. So, unsurprisingly, there's a comma and the verb is in the 2nd slot on the next sentence.
A.

[Hen Hanna]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Hen Hanna
Und Jesus sprach zu ihm: Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.
[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.

That's an interesting issue.
A good number of European languages have a distinction between plain adverbs and sentence adverbs. Here, wahrlich is a sentence in itself, it's not part of the next sentence. So, unsurprisingly, there's a comma and the verb is in the 2nd slot on the next sentence.
A.

Thank you... I tentatively disagree with your analysis.


my take is that adverbial phrases can be tacked on front
without affecting the German [verb is 2nd] rule.

but I'm not sure if the comma is required
after the [wahrlich]


Wahrlich, wahrlich, ich sage euch, so ihr den Vater etwas bitten werdet in meinem Namen, so wird er's euch geben. (John 16:23),



Mitten in dem kleinen Teiche <-- This is an [adverbial phrase]
Steht ein Pavillon aus grünem
Und aus weißem Porzellan.

so this is against my tentative "theory"

____________________________

Sehr [adj/adv] muss ich dich warnen.

but I'm still not sure if

[Adverbial phrase] ich [verb] ....

is common or good. HH

[Christian Weisgerber]

Post by Hen Hanna

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Hen Hanna
[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.

That's an interesting issue.
A good number of European languages have a distinction between plain adverbs and sentence adverbs. Here, wahrlich is a sentence in itself, it's not part of the next sentence. So, unsurprisingly, there's a comma and the verb is in the 2nd slot on the next sentence.

I agree with Arnaud's analysis. "Wahrlich" is not a sentence adverb.
It's used like an interjection here. Also, this use of "wahrlich"
is distinctly biblical style and when used in other contexts
understood as an allusion to the Bible.

Post by Hen Hanna
my take is that adverbial phrases can be tacked on front
without affecting the German [verb is 2nd] rule.

Then you should be able to show us plenty of examples.

Post by Hen Hanna
but I'm still not sure if
[Adverbial phrase] ich [verb] ....
is common or good. HH

It's ungrammatical.

Sentence-initial adverbial phrases are not rare in German.

Let's look at the first front page article currently up at Spiegel
Online:
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/london-mindestens-zwoelf-tote-bei-hochhausbrand-a-1152186.html

- Den ganzen Tag über steht eine Rauchsäule über London.
- Seit der Nacht kämpfen 200 Feuerwehrleute bis zur Erschöpfung gegen die
Flammen
- Erst am späten Nachmittag erreichen die Einsatzkräfte die oberste Etage.
- Sechs Minuten später sind die Retter vor Ort.
- Am Abend brennen noch einzelne Feuernester in dem Gebäude.
- Auf der Straße stehen Tische
- Auf Rasenflächen sind völlig erschöpfte Feuerwehrleute zu sehen
- Bisher sprechen die Einsatzkräfte von zwölf Todesopfern
- "Leider erwarte ich nicht, dass es noch mehr Überlebende geben wird"
- In dem Hochhaus soll es Anwohnern zufolge Beschwerden über
unzureichenden Brandschutz gegeben haben.

[Hen Hanna]

Post by Christian Weisgerber

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Hen Hanna
[ Wahrlich, ich sage dir ] <-- I'm assuming
this is not an exception to the [verb is 2nd] rule.

That's an interesting issue.
A good number of European languages have a distinction between plain adverbs and sentence adverbs. Here, wahrlich is a sentence in itself, it's not part of the next sentence. So, unsurprisingly, there's a comma and the verb is in the 2nd slot on the next sentence.

I agree with Arnaud's analysis. "Wahrlich" is not a sentence adverb.
It's used like an interjection here. Also, this use of "wahrlich"
is distinctly biblical style and when used in other contexts
understood as an allusion to the Bible.

Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.

Wahrlich, wahrlich, ich sage euch, so ihr den Vater etwas bitten werdet in meinem Namen, so wird er's euch geben. (John 16:23),


Thank you.

Is this pattern ever used
with something other than [wahrlich] ?

Is this pattern ever used in a way
that is not a parody ?

maybe this [wahrlich] was/is confusing to me
because it's a form of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_indirect_speech


and it's (was) confusing to me because
(I submit to you) that lay readers
read the following as a whole.

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man ...

but according to the German reading, He didn't say the
bracketed [I say unto you,] :

Verily [I say unto you,] There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man ...


HH

[wugi]

Post by Hen Hanna

Post by Christian Weisgerber
I agree with Arnaud's analysis. "Wahrlich" is not a sentence adverb.
It's used like an interjection here. Also, this use of "wahrlich"
is distinctly biblical style and when used in other contexts
understood as an allusion to the Bible.

Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.
Wahrlich, wahrlich, ich sage euch, so ihr den Vater etwas bitten werdet
in meinem Namen, so wird er's euch geben. (John 16:23),
Thank you.
Is this pattern ever used
with something other than [wahrlich] ?
Is this pattern ever used in a way
that is not a parody ?

- Is biblical usage a parody?

- It's a matter of distinguishing between an adverbial construct,
affecting verb second word order , and an interjection, not affecting it.
Even 'wahrlich" could be an adverb and thus followed by the verb. My own
example, poetic usage:
"Waarlijk heb ik de dood verlangd" ,
(metre-wise translation of Psappho's
"tethnakèn d'adolOs thelO",
http://www.wugi.be/poeziekHertaal.htm#Sapfo == Afscheid)

- Other examples/interjections:
Natuurlijk, het kan ook zijn dat ... (Of course, it could also be that ...)
Compare adv.:
Natuurlijk heeft hij ons gezien! (Of course he has seen us!)

Wel, misschien moesten we ... (Well, mayby we ought to ...)
Compare adv. (theatrical)
Wel moge het u bekomen; Wel bekome het u. (May it be to your benefit.)

Interjections-only:
Tja, nou ja, tss, euh, hm, Laat eens kijken, Verdomme, Jezus Christus,
"OMG", .....

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by wugi

Post by Hen Hanna

Post by Christian Weisgerber
I agree with Arnaud's analysis. "Wahrlich" is not a sentence adverb.
It's used like an interjection here. Also, this use of "wahrlich"
is distinctly biblical style and when used in other contexts
understood as an allusion to the Bible.

Wahrlich, ich sage dir, heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein.
Wahrlich, wahrlich, ich sage euch, so ihr den Vater etwas bitten werdet
in meinem Namen, so wird er's euch geben. (John 16:23),
Thank you.
Is this pattern ever used
with something other than [wahrlich] ?
Is this pattern ever used in a way
that is not a parody ?

- Is biblical usage a parody?
- It's a matter of distinguishing between an adverbial construct,
affecting verb second word order , and an interjection, not affecting it.
Even 'wahrlich" could be an adverb and thus followed by the verb. My own
"Waarlijk heb ik de dood verlangd" ,
(metre-wise translation of Psappho's
"tethnakèn d'adolOs thelO",
http://www.wugi.be/poeziekHertaal.htm#Sapfo == Afscheid)
Natuurlijk, het kan ook zijn dat ... (Of course, it could also be that ...)
Natuurlijk heeft hij ons gezien! (Of course he has seen us!)

This one would mean "he saw us naturally", if Natuurlijk were a regular adverb, which of course (Natuurlijk !!) it is not. :)
A.

[wugi]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by wugi
Natuurlijk, het kan ook zijn dat ... (Of course, it could also be that ...)
Natuurlijk heeft hij ons gezien! (Of course he has seen us!)

This one would mean "he saw us naturally", if Natuurlijk were a regular
adverb, which of course (Natuurlijk !!) it is not. :)

Natuurlijk, of course, is adverb only.
Natuurlijk, natural(ly), may be adj. and adv.

The former may be used as an interjection, the latter hardly so.
The latter, used as an adverb, is likely to be replaced by sth. like "op
natuurlijke wijze", esp. when too much mimicking the "of course" meaning
usage.
Instead of starting a sentence, interjections like the ones discussed
here may also terminate it, after a comma, (!)of course.

Natuurlijk, je kunt ook natuurlijk(/op natuurlijke wijze) gaan leven.
Natuurlijk kun je ook natuurlijk gaan leven.
Je kunt natuurlijk ook natuurlijk gaan leven.
Je kunt ook natuurlijk gaan leven, natuurlijk.
You can also have a go at living naturally, of course.

Natuurlijk vergt natuurlijk leven natuurlijke middelen.
Of course living naturally takes natural means.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by wugi

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by wugi
Natuurlijk, het kan ook zijn dat ... (Of course, it could also be that ...)
Natuurlijk heeft hij ons gezien! (Of course he has seen us!)

This one would mean "he saw us naturally", if Natuurlijk were a regular
adverb, which of course (Natuurlijk !!) it is not. :)

Natuurlijk, of course, is adverb only.

This is just sophistic BS.

in "Natuurlijk heeft hij ons gezien! (Of course he has seen us!)"
Natuurlijk is a sentence adverb, it has nothing to do with the next sentence.
If it had anything to do with the next sentence, it would mean "according to nature".
Stop taking other people for idiots.
A.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Post by wugi
Natuurlijk, of course, is adverb only.

Or a noun, as opposed to a 'kunstlijk', an artificial dead body.