Discussion:
Official German spelling update
(too old to reply)
Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-09 21:26:52 UTC
Permalink
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.

Press release (German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/amtliche-deutsche-rechtschreibung-ueberarbeitetes-regelwerk-und-neufassung-woerterverzeichnis-fuer-schule-und-verwaltung-verbindlich/

Report (148 pages, German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Bericht_2017-2023.pdf

Official ruleset (348 pages, German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Amtliches-Regelwerk_2024.pdf
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
HenHanna
2024-07-10 19:16:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christian Weisgerber
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.
Press release (German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/amtliche-deutsche-rechtschreibung-ueberarbeitetes-regelwerk-und-neufassung-woerterverzeichnis-fuer-schule-und-verwaltung-verbindlich/
Report (148 pages, German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Bericht_2017-2023.pdf
Official ruleset (348 pages, German)
https://www.rechtschreibrat.com/DOX/RfdR_Amtliches-Regelwerk_2024.pdf
i only hear about "SSS" ----- what else is an interesting Topic?
Paul Carmichael
2024-07-13 15:00:14 UTC
Permalink
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about its
activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised official
ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.
I was reading the tales of the Grimm bros. in old German. I gave up. I've
had to find a modern version.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es
HenHanna
2024-07-13 18:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Carmichael
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about its
activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised official
ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
This orthography is binding for use in government and schools.
I was reading the tales of the Grimm bros. in old German. I gave up. I've
had to find a modern version.
was it the font? (Hard to Read typeface) ?
Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-13 18:02:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christian Weisgerber
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
I should have mentioned: This has been agreed by the representatives
of the official bodies of
* Germany
* Austria
* Switzerland
* Bolzano-South Tyrol
* German-speaking Community of Belgium
* Liechtenstein

Luxembourg has non-voting representation.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Aidan Kehoe
2024-07-13 20:36:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Christian Weisgerber
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
I should have mentioned: This has been agreed by the representatives
of the official bodies of
* Germany
* Austria
* Switzerland
* Bolzano-South Tyrol
* German-speaking Community of Belgium
* Liechtenstein
Luxembourg has non-voting representation.
Thanks for the series of posts, I hadn’t noticed the change. Nothing drastic to
it, as far as I can see.
--
‘As I sat looking up at the Guinness ad, I could never figure out /
How your man stayed up on the surfboard after fourteen pints of stout’
(C. Moore)
Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-13 22:41:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aidan Kehoe
Post by Christian Weisgerber
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
Thanks for the series of posts, I hadn’t noticed the change. Nothing drastic to
it, as far as I can see.
I just finished going through the report. Among other things, it
details the changes and provides rationales. Overall those are
just minor tweaks for some corner cases. There are also some purely
editorial changes; the Council is proud to have condensed the
description of the comma rules and to have improved the overall
integration of ruleset and word list.

The report also contains some hints how the sausage is made. You
would think that orthography is a purely prescriptive endeavor, but
it turns out there is a large descriptive component. They monitor
the usage of professional writers (newspapers mostly) and are trying
to accommodate what people actually use if it can be formalized in
rules and doesn't interfere with other aspects of the orthography.
Also, assimilated spellings that fail to catch on (e.g. "Spagetti")
are dropped again.

The Austrians are running a project where they analyze secondary
school exit exams (Matura) for adherence to the standard orthography.
Two thirds of the mistakes are comma-related, one third are spelling
mistakes. More than half of the latter relate to the capitalization
rules, the next largest group is closed versus open compounds. Water
is wet.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Antonio Marques
2024-07-14 10:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Aidan Kehoe
Post by Christian Weisgerber
The Council for German Orthography has released the report about
its activities during the period 2017-2023 as well as a revised
official ruleset combined with a new edition of its word list.
Thanks for the series of posts, I hadn’t noticed the change. Nothing drastic to
it, as far as I can see.
I just finished going through the report. Among other things, it
details the changes and provides rationales. Overall those are
just minor tweaks for some corner cases. There are also some purely
editorial changes; the Council is proud to have condensed the
description of the comma rules and to have improved the overall
integration of ruleset and word list.
The report also contains some hints how the sausage is made. You
would think that orthography is a purely prescriptive endeavor, but
it turns out there is a large descriptive component. They monitor
the usage of professional writers (newspapers mostly) and are trying
to accommodate what people actually use if it can be formalized in
rules and doesn't interfere with other aspects of the orthography.
Also, assimilated spellings that fail to catch on (e.g. "Spagetti")
are dropped again.
The Austrians are running a project where they analyze secondary
school exit exams (Matura) for adherence to the standard orthography.
Two thirds of the mistakes are comma-related, one third are spelling
mistakes. More than half of the latter relate to the capitalization
rules, the next largest group is closed versus open compounds. Water
is wet.
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Stefan Ram
2024-07-14 11:20:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Certainly! I'd be happy to break down the German phrase "Vielen
Dank" grammatically for you. Let's analyze each component:

"Vielen"

- Part of speech: Adjective
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Plural
- Gender: Not specified (as it's plural)
- Meaning: "Many" or "Much"

"Vielen" is the declined form of the adjective "viel" (meaning
"much" or "many"). It's in the accusative case and plural form.

"Dank"

- Part of speech: Noun
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Singular
- Gender: Masculine
- Meaning: "Thanks" or "Gratitude"

"Dank" is a masculine noun meaning "thanks" or "gratitude."
It's in the accusative case.

The phrase "Vielen Dank" is a shortened version of a complete
sentence. In its full form, it would be:

"Ich sage Ihnen vielen Dank." (I give you many thanks.)

In this complete sentence:
- "Vielen" modifies "Dank"
- "Dank" is the direct object of the verb "sagen" (to say),
which is why it's in the accusative case

However, in everyday usage, Germans often omit the subject
and verb, leaving just the object phrase "Vielen Dank"
as a common expression of gratitude.

This phrase is used as a polite and somewhat formal way of
saying "Thank you very much" in German. It's more emphatic
than the simple "Danke" (thanks) and is appropriate in
many social and professional situations.
Ruud Harmsen
2024-07-14 18:56:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Antonio Marques
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Certainly! I'd be happy to break down the German phrase "Vielen
"Vielen"
- Part of speech: Adjective
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Plural
Wrong. It's singular here.
Post by Stefan Ram
- Gender: Not specified (as it's plural)
- Meaning: "Many" or "Much"
"Vielen" is the declined form of the adjective "viel" (meaning
"much" or "many"). It's in the accusative case and plural form.
"Dank"
- Part of speech: Noun
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Singular
- Gender: Masculine
- Meaning: "Thanks" or "Gratitude"
"Dank" is a masculine noun meaning "thanks" or "gratitude."
It's in the accusative case.
The phrase "Vielen Dank" is a shortened version of a complete
"Ich sage Ihnen vielen Dank." (I give you many thanks.)
- "Vielen" modifies "Dank"
- "Dank" is the direct object of the verb "sagen" (to say),
which is why it's in the accusative case
However, in everyday usage, Germans often omit the subject
and verb, leaving just the object phrase "Vielen Dank"
as a common expression of gratitude.
This phrase is used as a polite and somewhat formal way of
saying "Thank you very much" in German. It's more emphatic
than the simple "Danke" (thanks) and is appropriate in
many social and professional situations.
--
Ruud Harmsen, https://rudhar.com
Antonio Marques
2024-07-15 17:49:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Antonio Marques
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Certainly! I'd be happy to break down the German phrase "Vielen
"Vielen"
- Part of speech: Adjective
- Case: Accusative
- Number: Plural
Wrong. It's singular here.
(Thanks, Stefan, for the fantastic ChatGPT impersonation, and I mean it 😄
)

I'd never thought of _vielen_ as a singular, hence my request.

It still sounds odd to me. Christian says Dank is to be read as a mass
noun, but I can't quite make that work.

I'm also a bit puzzled that german children won't instinctively interpret
vielen as a plural.
Stefan Ram
2024-07-15 19:19:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
It still sounds odd to me. Christian says Dank is to be read as a mass
noun, but I can't quite make that work.
So, I guess this, er . . . I wasn't initially aware that this
case needed more attention than your usual combo of two words!

Behind "vielen" ("many") usually stands a countable noun,
like in, "Bei vielen Adjektiven ist eine Steigerung . . ."
("In the case of many adjectives, a gradation . . .").

When we want to express a high degree of something with an
uncountable masculine noun, we say "viel". For example, "Viel
Erfolg!" ("Much success!"), or "Viel Spaß!" ("Much fun!"). (From,
"Ich wünsche Ihnen viel Erfolg!" ["I wish you every success!"] and,
"Ich wünsche Ihnen viel Spaß! ["I wish you lots of fun!"].)

So, it should be "Viel Dank!" ("Much thank!") - this isn't a wish,
but it should also be in the accusative, as it would probably be
shortened from "Ich sage Ihnen viel Dank!" ("I'm expressing to you
much thank!"), where it would need to be in the accusative.

If "Dank" was countable, we'd probably say *"Ich sagen Ihnen viele
Danke!" ("I'm giving you many thanks."), so not "vielen" either.
(Nowadays, "thanks" is considered a noun with no plural.)

Nobody knows why the formula "Vielen Dank!" got stuck and
is used instead of "Viel Dank!". And since we don't really
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.

Anywho, my initial response was way off base - I clearly
underestimated the complexity of your query. My bad on that one!
Stefan Ram
2024-07-15 19:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
If "Dank" was countable, we'd probably say *"Ich sagen Ihnen viele
Danke!" ("I'm giving you many thanks."), so not "vielen" either.
(Nowadays, "thanks" is considered a noun with no plural.)
Nobody knows why the formula "Vielen Dank!" got stuck and
is used instead of "Viel Dank!". And since we don't really
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
Two corrections: Please read:

(Nowadays, "Dank" is considered a noun with no plural.)

and

understand the expression "Vielen Dank!", we can't analyze

with a comma.
Stefan Ram
2024-07-15 19:46:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.

|Sie würden vielen Dank verdienen, wenn Sie uns eine solche
|Geschichte vortrügen
Goethe

|("You would deserve many thanks if you told us such a story")

|2. Ohne vorangehenden Artikel u. ä. werden "viel" und "wenig"
|häufig flexionslos gebraucht. Im Singular gilt folgendes:
|
|(Im Nominativ Maskulinum nur ohne Endung:) Wo viel Licht ist, da
|ist viel Schatten (Sprichwort). Dazu gehört wenig Mut.
|
|(Im Akkusativ Maskulinum meist flexionslos:) Ich habe
|viel/wenig Kummer in meinem Leben gehabt. (Aber nur:) Vielen Dank!
|
Grammatik

|("2. without a preceding article etc., "viel" and "wenig" are
|often used without inflection. In the singular, the following
|applies:
|
|[In the nominative masculine only without ending:] Where there
|is much light, there is viel shadow [proverb]. This requires
|wenig courage.
|
|[In the accusative masculine, usually without inflection:] I have
|had viel/wenig sorrows in my life. [But only:] Vielen Dank!")
|
Grammar Book
Stefan Ram
2024-07-15 20:28:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
|viel/wenig Kummer in meinem Leben gehabt. (Aber nur:) Vielen Dank!
Grammatik
This is from Grimm's dictionary:

|viel glücks als segenswunsch, viel danks als ausdruck der
|erkenntlichkeit, jetzt auch in gehobner sprache kaum mehr
|gebräuchlich (viel glück, vielen dank)

|viel danks für dein andenken Merck briefs. 1, 188 (Wieland).

|die unflectierte form hält sich gut bei verbindungen wie viel
|dank (vgl. 10, a),

|jetzt ist wohl vielen dank das gebräuchliche; dagegen ist
|vieles glück! nicht aufgekommen.

BTW: We had a thread

"vielen Dank" - wieso "vielen"?

in de.etc.sprache.deutsch in 2006, where I wrote
<dank-***@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>.
Stefan Ram
2024-07-15 20:52:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
BTW: We had a thread
"vielen Dank" - wieso "vielen"?
|Das ist in der Tat eigenartig. Normalerweise wird "viel" und "wenig" im
|Singular nur dann gebeugt, wenn es determiniert ist: "mein vieles Geld",
|"das viele Geld". Eine Ellipse wie "haben Sie meinen vielen Dank" wäre
|eine Erklärung, klingt aber holprig.
Helmut Richter

|Es heißte zwar "viel Geld", aber nicht "viel Euro", sondern "viele
|Euro". Eine andere Erklärung wäre also, daß "Dank" hier als zählbar
|behandelt wird. Dabei sollte zwar normalerweise die Pluralform zur
|Anwendung kommen, allerdings hat "Dank" gar keine. Ähnlich merkwürdig,
|aber diese Interpretation bestätigend, ist "tausend Dank".
Oliver Cromm

|Bei Adelung findet man allerdings auch: "Wir wollen tausend Spaß
|mit ihm haben." Außerdem gab es auch tausend Glück, Freude usw.,
|von Sackerment mal ganz zu schweigen. ;)
|
|| [...] und da haben die beiden Hünentöchter tausend Spaß mit
|| dem niedlichen Spielzeug, [...]
|[Bechstein: Deutsches Sagenbuch. Deutsche Literatur von Luther bis
|Tucholsky, S. 46368 (vgl. Bechstein-Sagen, S. 282)]
|
|| Der kleine Wilhelm fieng schon an, Worte zu stammeln, und
|| machte durch seine Liebkosungen, und durch seine unschuldige
|| Fragen seinen Eltern tausend Freude.
|[Miller: Siegwart. Eine Klostergeschichte. Deutsche Literatur
|von Luther bis Tucholsky, S. 394819 (vgl. Miller-Siegwart, S. 1055)]
|
|| Da der Pastor hörte, daß wir auf die Akademie gingen, wünscht'
|| er uns tausend Glück.
|[Hippel: Lebensläufe nach aufsteigender Linie. Deutsche Literatur von
|Luther bis Tucholsky, S. 261896 (vgl. Hippel-Lebensläufe Bd. 2, S. 117)]
|
|| Ach die schnöde Kleiderpracht
|| Macht ihm tausend Leid.
|[Droste-Hülshoff: Gedichte (Die Ausgabe von 1844). Deutsche Literatur
|von Luther bis Tucholsky, S. 104427 (vgl. Droste-SW Bd. 1, S. 169)]
|
|Zur Flexion von "viel" wird im Paul (Dt. Wörterbuch, 2002) u. a.
|folgendes ausgeführt:
|
|| Andererseits kommt auch der Nom. und Akk. Sg. flektiert vor (_vielen
|| Dank, viele Mühe, vieles Lesen_, doch kaum _vieler Dank_), wobei auf
|| den Adjektivformen immer ein Nachdruck liegt, während _viel_ gewöhnl.
|| enklitisch ist;
|
Wolf Busch

|Vorher heißt es im Artikel sinngemäß:
|
|Bis ins 20. Jh. war es die Regel, daß "viel" im Nom. Akk. Sg.
|flexionslos blieb, während es sonst flektiert wurde (viel Geld -
|vieles Geldes, mit vielem Gelde).
|
|Deswegen werden im obigen Zitat nur der Nom. und Akk. Sg. erwähnt,
|denn daß in den anderen Fällen flektiert wird, wurde ja schon
|vorher gesagt.
|
|Ob man wirklich "vieles Geldes" gesagt hat, wie im Paul behauptet
|wird, weiß ich nicht. Auf der DVD-ROM "Deutsche Literatur von
|Luther bis Tucholsky" findet man für "vieles Geldes" keinen Beleg.
|Aber "mit vielem Geld" scheint früher tatsächlich recht häufig
|verwendet worden zu sein:
|
|mit viel Geld - 3 Fundstellen
|mit vielem Geld[e] - 22 Fundstellen
|
|Oder auch:
|
|mit viel Freude - 2 Fundstellen
|mit vieler Freude - 23 Fundstellen
|
|Präpositionen mit Akk. verhalten sich allerdings auch so
|ähnlich:
|
|um viel Geld - 1 Fundstelle
|um vieles Geld - 11 Fundstellen
|
|ohne viel Geld - 1 Fundstelle
|ohne vieles Geld - 0 Fundstellen
|
|ohne viel Mühe - 4 Fundstellen
|ohne viele Mühe - 14 Fundstellen
|
|Im Paul wird außerdem behauptet, daß noch im 18. Jh. die
|Verwendung der flexionslosen Form größere Ausdehnung hatte ("aus
|viel Ursachen"; "an so viel blühenden Stellen").
|
Wolf Busch
Ruud Harmsen
2024-07-16 12:12:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Stefan Ram
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.
Why? It's a singular masculin accusative!
--
Ruud Harmsen, https://rudhar.com
Antonio Marques
2024-07-16 15:22:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Stefan Ram
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.
Why? It's a singular masculin accusative!
Be that as it may, that's precisely how I've felt about it for a long time,
and the mismatch is what prompted me to ask for clarification.

And to read it as a count noun, I'd need 'viel' rather than 'vielen'. Cf
'viel Glück', not 'vieles'.

So I rather thought it was a fossil form, possibly misanalyzed to the
mondegreen point, maybe even missing a syllable at the end, or /dank/ not
even being originally the noun form.

That some confusion does exist around it seems to be supported by Stefan's
quotations.
Stefan Ram
2024-07-16 15:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
So I rather thought it was a fossil form, possibly misanalyzed to the
mondegreen point, maybe even missing a syllable at the end, or /dank/ not
even being originally the noun form.
In 2009, Melanie Löber wondered, "Could 'viel' have been
inflected more in the past, so that "vielen Dank" represents
a fossilized form from earlier times?".

|Now one could assume that "viel" was possibly inflected more
|in the past and gradually lost its inflectional forms.
|According to our sources, however, the opposite is the case:
|both Hermann Paul's "Mittelhochdeutschen Grammatik" and the
|"Deutschen Wörterbuch" of the Grimm Brothers assume that
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
|from the following examples, this usage persisted well beyond
|Middle High German.
|
|Examples
|
|so ein mensch hat hie erlitten vil unglücks
|(H. Sachs, 16th century)
|
|viel glücks! ich will euch denn nur hier verlassen
|(G. E. Lessing, late 18th century)
|
|viel danks für dein andenken
|(C. M. Wieland, late 18th century)
|
|Subsequently, the noun could have developed into an article
|word that corresponds to today's uninflected "viel".
|In addition, a few forms of "viel" that were inflected like
|adjectives are already attested in Middle High German texts.
|
|However, why the inflected forms are used in certain
|constructions and the uninflected forms in others does not lie
|in German grammar itself, but in language use, i.e., all
|speakers and writers of German decide together which usage
|prevails. And in the case of "vielen Dank", they have evidently
|decided in favor of the inflected form of "viel" in deviation
|from the general rule.
|
Melanie Löber in 2009.
Helmut Richter
2024-07-16 17:03:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
In 2009, Melanie Löber wondered, "Could 'viel' have been
inflected more in the past, so that "vielen Dank" represents
a fossilized form from earlier times?".
|Now one could assume that "viel" was possibly inflected more
|in the past and gradually lost its inflectional forms.
|both Hermann Paul's "Mittelhochdeutschen Grammatik" and the
|"Deutschen Wörterbuch" of the Grimm Brothers assume that
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
|from the following examples, this usage persisted well beyond
|Middle High German.
|
|Examples
|[...]
|
|However, why the inflected forms are used in certain
|constructions and the uninflected forms in others does not lie
|in German grammar itself, but in language use, i.e., all
|speakers and writers of German decide together which usage
|prevails. And in the case of "vielen Dank", they have evidently
|decided in favor of the inflected form of "viel" in deviation
|from the general rule.
I think this is the situation. You cannot express „viel Dank“ and wish
„vieles Glück“ but only vice versa „vielen Dank“ and „viel Glück“. And with
infinitives used as nouns you often have the freedom to use either. Example
(Qoh. 12:12; various translations):

Viel Predigen macht den Leib müde. (Luther 1545)
Viel Studieren macht den Leib müde. (Luther 1912, 2017)
Viel Studieren ermüdet den Leib. (EÜ 1980, 2016)
Das viele Grübeln kann dich bis zur Erschöpfung ermüden. (GNB)
Das viele Studieren ... (several others, modern)

I have not found "Vieles Studieren ..." but it would have been idiomatic as well.

I see hardly any difference in meaning. "das viele Studieren" may mean an
exactly specified endeavour of which the reader is warned; whereas "viel
Studieren" and "vieles Studieren" warns of any action involving intensive
studies, but that is not a clear-cut distinction.

--
Helmut Richter
Stefan Ram
2024-07-16 17:37:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
The omission of the partitive is akin a bit to when the "of"
is dropped in "a couple friends." Compare that also to German:
"eine Art von Zahlwort" -> "eine Art Zahlwort".
Antonio Marques
2024-07-17 17:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Stefan Ram
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
The omission of the partitive is akin a bit to when the "of"
"eine Art von Zahlwort" -> "eine Art Zahlwort".
Can one still say 'viel Danks/Glücks', or would that be wrong outright?
Stefan Ram
2024-07-17 18:17:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Stefan Ram
|"viel" (or the Middle High German vil) was originally used as
|a noun that entailed a partitive genitive. As you can see
The omission of the partitive is akin a bit to when the "of"
"eine Art von Zahlwort" -> "eine Art Zahlwort".
Can one still say 'viel Danks/Glücks', or would that be wrong outright?
It's possible that there are regions where this is allowed,
but to me it sounds wrong.

(It can be found in some editions of "Nathan der Weise" (1779)
[Lessing 1729/1781] and other old texts.)

For me, it's not so much the genitive here as the absence of
an article that sounds wrong. "Ich wünsche viel des Glücks!",
with an article, would sound bizarre, but less wrong.
Stefan Ram
2024-07-17 21:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
For me, it's not so much the genitive here as the absence of
an article that sounds wrong. "Ich wünsche viel des Glücks!",
with an article, would sound bizarre, but less wrong.
In fact, one can find a few examples of texts of this kind
apparently written today on the Web:

|Apr 15, 2024 · ich wünsche viel des verdienten Erfolges!
|Gefällt mir · Antworten. 1 Reaktion. Zum Anzeigen oder
|Hinzufügen von Kommentaren einloggen ...

|und wünsche viel des Guten gerne. Ich wünsche Dir ein
|Neu-Entdecken,. das sich aus dem Erlebten speist. Ich wünsche
|Dir, Dich zu erschrecken, an dem, was Du ...

, written, perhaps, with a kind of "poetic license".

Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-17 20:19:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
Can one still say 'viel Danks/Glücks', or would that be wrong outright?
Outright wrong.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Antonio Marques
2024-07-16 15:22:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ruud Harmsen
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Stefan Ram
understand the expression "Vielen Dank!" we can't analyze
it further. It's opaque to us.
The "vielen" feels as if the formally singular "Dank" is taken
"semantically" to be a plural.
Why? It's a singular masculin accusative!
Be that as it may, that's precisely how I've felt about it for a long time,
and the mismatch is what prompted me to ask for clarification.

And to read it as a count noun, I'd need 'viel' rather than 'vielen'. Cf
'viel Glück', not 'vieles'.

So I rather thought it was a fossil form, possibly misanalyzed to the
mondegreen point, maybe even missing a syllable at the end, or /dank/ not
even being originally the noun form.

That some confusion does exist around it seems to be supported by Stefan's
quotations.
Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-15 19:54:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
I'd never thought of _vielen_ as a singular, hence my request.
It still sounds odd to me. Christian says Dank is to be read as a mass
noun, but I can't quite make that work.
I'm also a bit puzzled that german children won't instinctively interpret
vielen as a plural.
How so? There's no preceding determiner, so strong declension
applies. If "vielen" was plural, it would have to be dative. Also,
I think "Dank" simply cannot be plural without an ending like -e,
-er, -en, or -s. And if it was a dative plural noun, it would have
to terminate in -n or -s as a further constraint.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Christian Weisgerber
2024-07-14 14:55:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antonio Marques
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
It literally means "many thanks". Whereas the English noun only
exists in the plural (no such thing as expressing "a thank"), the
German one is a mass noun without plural, so the expression is in
the singular. "Dank" is a masculine noun, so the -en agreement
indicates that the noun phrase is in the accusative case. Clearly
it has been extracted from a sentence like "ich schulde Ihnen vielen
Dank" (I owe you many thanks) or such, but nowadays it's a fixed
expression.

Compare "guten Tag!", which is also an elliptical expression in the
accusative case.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Ruud Harmsen
2024-07-14 18:54:49 UTC
Permalink
Sun, 14 Jul 2024 10:47:27 -0000 (UTC): Antonio Marques
Post by Antonio Marques
Could you break down _Vielen Dank_ grammatically for us?
Ich geben Ihnen vielen Dank. Männlich, Einzahl, Akkusativ, ohne
Bestimmwort.
--
Ruud Harmsen, https://rudhar.com
Loading...