this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
161 points (96.5% liked)

Europe

1355 readers
301 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

How’s it feel rest of the world? To have English seep into your language after so many centuries of only having your languages seep into English.

But for real, I get both sides here, apostrophic possession is nice, it’s convenient, it’s useful, and it’s foreign. I’m sure many Germans are mad, but it seems like it’s Germans doing the thing pissing them off.

[–] pedz@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

How’s it feel rest of the world? To have English seep into your language after so many centuries of only having your languages seep into English.

French: French

Although, aside from the great vowel shift, we gladly contributed at fucking up English orthography.

[–] pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

In German we simply add an s for the genitive, and we add an apostrophe when a letter is missing.

For example Jacob's book would be "Jakobs Buch" ¹ but John's book would be "Johannes' Buch", not "Johannes's Buch" ² and also not "Johannes'' Buch" ³.

¹ not "Jakob's Buch", which is called the "Deppenapostroph" - fool's apostrophe

² fool's apostrophe

³ fool's apostrophe and a second apostrophe to mark the cancelled letter

The genitive is nice, convenient and useful, yes. But there's no reason to add an apostrophe when no letter is missing.

(And as explained above, no, it is not foreign, this isn't changing anything in spoken language either, it's just a common spelling error due to commonly seeing it in English)

To draw a comparison regarding how annoying it is for anyone who cares about written language: It's quite similar to as if people in English suddenly started marking the plural with an apostrophe. Or if "would of" instead of "would have" would become correct.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Idk what to tell you, but when people start spelling things differently because they see it that way in a foreign language and think their language is the same that’s borrowing a grammatical rule from a foreign language. It starts by being wrong, then it becomes a common mistake, then an alternative rule, then eventually ya borrowed it. The mistake is the quantum component of natural evolution whether it’s DNA, language, or anything else self replicating.

We actually also do the apostrophe for when a letter is missing as well as the genitive. Probably got the former off y’all and nicked the latter from some other language. We speak frankenstein’s language after all.

Personally I have no say in this. When using German as a native English speaker my aim is to mimic and err on the side of more “correct”. If Germans keep making this mistake though some are bound to eventually make it a stylistic choice or do it because it’s natural to them.

[–] pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works 1 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

So if many people (still a minority by a large margin of course) started writing things like "I would of visited the museum's today but I saw two rare bird's, their just so fascinating." it should become correct?

It's not like a majority is using apostrophes for the genitive in German. But since it's so easy to spot the few % of miswritten genitives just stand out.

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

If it's commonly understood, yes. That is how language works. Words change over time. Reading "would of" is jarring as fuck but it's also not really mistakable for anything other than would've.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

So out of curiosity I found out how it happened in English and it’s dumber than I could’ve imagined. So yeah, idiots being wrong absolutely can eventually make it correct.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Truly the English are a plague unto the world

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

They're also the reason we can communicate with almost everyone on the world. (that's younger than 50 and not French)

Imagine the Internet without a common language.

Hide yo' kids, hide yo' wife, the lingua franca English is coming for yo' Deutsch.

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Meanwhile in English, the semicolon is dead -- long live the dash.

[–] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The dash implies a sidenote, an additional relevant thought, while a semicolon denotes a break in the sentence that joins together 2 full sentences that are ostensibly thematically related. They aren't interchangeable.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

I think they meant in common usage; that's the impression I get - just sayin'.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I regularly use the semicolon; it makes me happy.

[–] bekopharm@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 1 day ago

Can relate ;)

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As long as you're communicating your ideas clearly, to each their own!

[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Skibidi toilet my Ohio, skibidi toilet

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

As long as it's an em dash (—) and not a hyphen (-) I'm OK with it. A double hyphen is acceptable but not ideal.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the semicolon is dead -- long live the dash.

I see what you did there. But a colon would be best, right ?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (12 children)

They serve different functions; each has different length - visually, verbally, and semantically.

[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Hyphen -

En Dash –

Em Dash —

- – —

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] muelltonne@feddit.org 25 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Language is democratic. If people are starting to speak or write in a certain way, that is the correct way to use a language. I know that we have all these organizations trying to define "correct" language use, but if many Germans are deciding that they want to use this apostrophe, that should be correct.

And there is another issue: There are a lot of people looking down on people who can't read or write correctly. You can see this here: people are calling other people itiots just because they are using an apostrophe in a not officially accepted way. Which should never, never happen

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What is your opinion on people using "would of" instead of "would have"?

I don't think that accepting the lowest common denominator or following the tyrrany of majority is particularly democratic, when it's clearly destroying the meaning of the language.

Sure, so let's say we accept it, but then how do we teach children these new rules? It'll only result in further degradation of the language because nobody knows what is right or wrong anymore.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Seems pretty straightforward... Teach it like we always have, and then just add a quick, "the traditional contraction expands into, 'should have,' but recently, 'should of' has become popular colloquially despite the apparent error."

Or something like that, I don't know. It's not like English doesn't already have a billion exceptions to every single rule. What's one more slang term?

Do I like it? Fuck no. It sounds/looks bad, and I will probably silently judge you if you say or write it lol

[–] DempstersBox@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Well for starters, kids aren't going to whinge about it- they're just going to use it, generally correctly for their setting.

Headlines when a royal family kid is bilingual, every day regular-ass survival when a poor border town kid does it, unprompted.

I mean, the royal kids totally would of got it on their own, right?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Aren’t royals supposed to be bilingual? Like, that’s part of their job

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

First off, a) Standard German is not a language that's spoken anywhere in the country in the first place, not even at the Tagesschau studios. It's a solely literary language, defined somewhat semi-democratically by book and newspaper editors and b) this is about orthography, not language qua language.

This is not about telling people whether they should say "ich bin am gehen" or "ich bin gehend" -- both are incorrect in Standard Geman, the reason it doesn't have a present progressive is that people couldn't agree which form to use, and the different forms are quite far apart. So it's avoided by editors, hence it's not part of the language, "ich gehe gerade" is used instead which is (IMNSHO) unnatural but also not terribly awkward. That kind of thing is way more at odds with how people actually speak than orthography, and accepted without second thought: Because Standard German is a Dachsprache. If I want to talk to a Bavarian, compromises will have to be made.

Then, an orthography has to be, and this might be surprising to Anglophones, one thing: Logical and predictable, inferrable from how you speak and what things mean. The idiot's apostrophe is not. It makes no sense, it follows no rule. If I say "gehn" then I can infer, from a uniform rule, that I should write "gehen" -- because folks in the south say "gehe", and well a compromise is when noone is happy. But using a different rule for "the dog's bone" and "Jane's bar"? There's no justification for that. None. It introduces a distinction where there's none.

The issue I have with this whole thing isn't that it seems to be influenced by English, the issue I have is that it makes as much sense as English orthography.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

“There is a long tradition of conservative circles fretting about international influences on the German languages,” said Stefanowitsch. “It used to be French, and now it’s mainly English”.

Heh.

The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.

--James Nicoll

However, guidelines issued by the body regulating the use of Standard High German orthography have clarified that the use of the punctuation mark colloquially known as the Deppenapostroph (“idiot’s apostrophe”) has become so widespread that it is permissible – as long as it separates the genitive ‘s’ within a proper name.

Hmm.

So how do they deal with the more-complex cases?

https://www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/whats-the-rule-for-doing-a-possessive-after-the-word-s/

Singular nouns ending in S

Rule 1: In general, you form a possessive singular noun (both proper and common) by adding an apostrophe and the letter S to the end of the word.

  • the flower’s petals

  • Riley’s car

That’s simple enough. It’s when the car belongs to a person named Chris, or we’re talking about the petals of a crocus that the rules get blurry. Most experts and guides say you should add an apostrophe and an S to both proper and common nouns to make them possessive even when they end in S. So, using the examples above, it would be:

* Chris’s car

  • the crocus’s petals 

Not everyone agrees with this method, however, and some, such as the Associated Press Stylebook, nod in favor of adding only an apostrophe to make a proper noun possessive, such as:

  • Chris’ car

  • Dickens’ novels

To add even more confusion, AP Style also has an exception if the word following the possessive starts with an S, stating that in those cases only the apostrophe should be added. So it would be:

  • Texas’s people

Texas’ streams 

In 2019, the AP raised quite the ruckus when they tweeted that they were considering adding an S after the apostrophe for singular proper nouns, as in Mavis Staples’s album or Martha Reeves’s concert. To date, no changes have been made, but as you can see, it’s an ever-evolving, highly volatile topic. 

Plural nouns ending in S

Rule 2: Plural nouns, on the other hand, generally don’t get an extra S, just an apostrophe. Most experts suggest you form the plural form of the word first, then add the apostrophe.

For example: 

  • the Joneses’ house 

  • the classes’ rules

Most say possessive words should generally read as you would speak them. 

The one-syllable rule

When it comes to historical proper names or those found in the Bible, however, there is another rule many choose to follow.

Rule 3: According to some, those words with two or more syllables typically just get an apostrophe after the final S, while one-syllable words getting both an apostrophe and an S.

For example:

  • Jesus’ teachings

  • Zeus’s temper

Some people apply it to more recent names as well, such as Dr. Seuss’s writings or Kenny Rogers’ songs, while others believe they all should also get an additional S. 

Singular nouns in plural form

Rule 4: When it comes to singular nouns that are plural words, they typically just get the apostrophe.

For example, the Beatles is a singular noun, but it’s in the form of a plural word. So, it would be:

  • The Beatles’ album

For the sake of …

Rule 5: Whether a noun ends in an S or not, if it’s followed by the word sake, most say it just gets an apostrophe.

For example:

  • for goodness’ sake

  • for conscience’ sake 

  • for appearance’ sake

Others, such as the Chicago Manual of Style, say if the word before sake ends in an S, then it should just get an apostrophe. Others should get an apostrophe and an S. So, it would be:

  • for goodness’ sake

  • for conscience’s sake 

  • for appearance’s sake

Like, there's a whole rabbit hole to go down there.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Knuschberkeks@leminal.space 12 points 1 day ago (8 children)

I cringe every time I see it, but just because I don't like it doesn't mean it should be wrong. It is super wide spread to use it that way (even more wide spread than the "correct" way), so it should be considered legal imho. Sidenote: I also hate that the plural of "house" isn't "hice" in eglish, but what can I do.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›