--part1_b0.c854ac8.274bf7c3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Folks Here is something to make us all think Jack --part1_b0.c854ac8.274bf7c3_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <[email protected].com> Received: from rly-xd02.mx.aol.com (rly-xd02.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.167]) by air-xd03.mail.aol.com (v77.14) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:14:22 -0500 Received: from jj.egroups.com (jj.egroups.com [208.50.144.82]) by rly-xd02.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:13:52 1900 X-eGroups-Return: [email protected].com Received: from [10.1.4.56] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 20 Nov 2000 21:12:07 -0000 X-Sender: [email protected] X-Apparently-To: [email protected] Received: (EGP: mail-6_2_1); 20 Nov 2000 21:12:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 72038 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2000 21:12:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Nov 2000 21:12:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp6.mindspring.com) (207.69.200.110) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Nov 2000 22:13:07 -0000 Received: from default (user-38lc0io.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.2.88]) by smtp6.mindspring.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA11665 for <[email protected]>; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:11:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 From: "dustbunny" <[email protected]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list [email protected]; contact [email protected] Delivered-To: mailing list [email protected] Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:12:20 -0800 Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: [germanfriends] Crisis of Letters in Germany Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spelling reforms have touched off an angry debate and have left the public, students and teachers confused Jody K. Biehl San Francisco Chronicle Berlin -- German trains may run with uncanny precision, but ask any person standing on the tracks how to spell the word for ``train travel'' and you might be greeted with a gaze of pure Teutonic panic. Indeed, this meticulous nation of 83 million inhabitants has not suddenly forgotten how to spell. But the entire country -- and the German-speaking nations of Austria and Switzerland -- are gripped in a seething debate about the future of their language. The debate focuses on an international attempt to make German easier by eliminating 100 spelling rules, including those that permit famously long compound words like Feierabendverkehr (rush-hour traffic) and Rettungschwimmeruebungsplatz (lifeguard training area). The reforms also reduce the number of rules for commas, from an astonishing 52 to nine and replace Americanized spellings for words like ``ketchup'' and ``disco'' with the Germanized Ketschup and Disko. ``It is absolute lunacy,'' said Thomas Steinfeld, chief literary critic for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a staunchly conservative newspaper. ``Can you imagine telling generations of people -- let alone writers, historians and other academics -- that the way they learned to spell is wrong? It is a linguistic nightmare.'' Examples of the new grammar are as complicated as the old rules are long. In general, they break up compound words into various parts, so Zugfahren (to ride a train) becomes Zug fahren. Steinfeld insists such shifts alter the meaning of many words. A good comparison, he said, would be to take the English word undercover and break it into under cover. ``You end up not knowing if the person is a spy or if they are going to bed,'' he said. ``You want to ask under cover of what, a blanket?'' In some cases, critics say the new rules push otherwise separated words together, resulting in an awkward situation of having three consonants in a row, as in Shifffahrt, the word for navigation. Language reform is based on a 1960s notion that the way people write German is an automatic clue to their social status. In theory, class barriers disappear by simplifying the language. The new spelling, which took effect in 1998 in schools, government offices and courts of law, has resulted in orthographic chaos in the usually placid world of German publishing. According to Steinfeld, every dictionary published since 1998 is different because publishers are also struggling to understand the new rules and explain away the old ones. Moreover, teachers complain that publishers of classic books often don't adhere to the new rules, leaving students confused and unsure of spelling and grammar. ``Instead of being more modern, we are reverting back to the 19th century where there were no standard rules of spelling and every publishing house was free to make up its own style,'' Steinfeld said. The changes are happening at a time when many Germans are suffering from what the media describes as ``reform fatigue.'' In recent months, they have seen sweeping changes hit their tax system and have watched in horror as legislators threaten to do away with cushy pensions that have been a popular perk of the West German system since the 1950s. Health insurance and commercial laws are also under scrutiny as Germany struggles to find its way in the global economy. But fine-tuning the language, it seems, is one step many Germans are not willing to make in the name of modernity. ``We have tried the language reform for the past two years and I think we have to come to the conclusion that people don't want it,'' said Ulrike Flach, chairman of the education committee in the German parliament. ``I think we should stop it now.'' But that is not likely to happen any time soon. Since the reforms were agreed upon in 1996 by the cultural ministers of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein, the German government has spent more than $200 million to rewrite school textbooks and official brochures. More significantly, several cultural ministers would have to admit that they were wrong. In recent months, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has enraged government officials by branding the reforms ``ridiculous'' and ``a total failure.'' In a much-read editorial, the newspaper, which still uses 19th century typeface and refuses to publish photos on its front page, announced that it had abandoned the new rules in favor of classic, rule-bound German. Leading literary figures, including Nobel laureate Guenter Grass and the conservative Academy of Language and Literature, have rallied around the newspaper, creating a bizarre alliance between political foes. Grass, a leftist who has long refused to be interviewed by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reporters, has quipped that he would happily allow the newspaper to ``continue publishing nonsense about me as long as it is written according to the old rules.'' In response, Education Minister Klaus Boeger says the anti-reform campaign will have no effect. ``We are not in the habit of revoking decisions of the Cultural Ministers' Conference merely because an important newspaper returns to the old spelling rules,'' he said. ********************************************************************** MESSAGES CAN BE IN GERMAN AND ENGLISH ON THIS LIST. <http://www.egroups.com/group/germanfriends/info.html> ********************************************************************** To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [email protected] Visit the German Corner: http://www.germancorner.com ********************************************************************** --part1_b0.c854ac8.274bf7c3_boundary--

[email protected] wrote: > > > Hello Folks > Here is something to make us all think > > Jack > There once was a mindset that there was a limited vocabulary of English words. Declensions were fixed. Spellings were fixed. No further improvement nor enlargement nor diminution was to be tolerated. The dictionary was the repository of the language. If it isn't in the dictionary, it's wrong. Time has proven that no such edict is enforceable. The publishers soon advertised that they were not the managers of the language, only the reporters of the current state of affairs. Not much happened to communication as a result of this upheaval. There are a great many more people now. That means there is a greater opportunity for individuals to be inexperienced with words to the point of coining new. But there doesn't seem to be any adverse effect as a result, except in special cases where someone, trying to be something he isn't, is talking to someone who is unpretentious. One other possibly adverse effect is the stupefaction of gentle people by the spin doctors who have become so expert in ambiguity as to be able to deliver themselves of bombastic tirades that conceal more than they reveal. But, all in all, the people succeed in achieving some happiness without a rigid rule of language. Stan from Livonia, MI