Zompist Bboard Again

Question for any native German speakers here: I hear that there are two words Wagen ‘cart’ and wagen ‘dare’. Are these homophones or can they be pronounced differently?

(For context, I’m editing an article which implies that those two words are pronounced differently. I know nothing of German, so I have no idea if this is true.)

I'd say they're homophone, but the verb sounds a bit old-fashioned these days.

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 10:33 am I'd say they're homophone, but the verb sounds a bit old-fashioned these days.

Thanks!

There might be a register difference that could result in a different pronunciation. The noun would have schwa deletion (and possibly consonant coalescence into a velar nasal), e.g. [va:(:)N), whereas the verb would be immune to either the second or both processes [va:g(@)n]. But I don't know how real this difference is. I think for me both undergo both processes.

Something I have observed in my Freundeskreis is that they tend to pronounce French words that have a -ṼN in there as -Vŋ. The vowel is not nasalized, but rather laxed a bit. For example:

Cousin 'cousin' [ku'zɛŋ]
Beton 'concrete' [be'tɔŋ]
Séance 'séance' [sej'ɐŋs]
Trance 'trance' [tʁɐŋs] (the music genre is [tɹæns]).

Is this common throughout Germany, or is this pronunciation considered rustic?

I was taught [kʊˈzaŋ] (true [a], rather than [ä] which everyone uses ⟨a⟩ for, because it's more common), with the vowel liɡhtly nasalised. No idea how native that is, and I never learned the other words. I'm probably not much help.

Raholeun wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:55 am Something I have observed in my Freundeskreis is that they tend to pronounce French words that have a -ṼN in there as -Vŋ. The vowel is not nasalized, but rather laxed a bit. For example:

Cousin 'cousin' [ku'zɛŋ]
Beton 'concrete' [be'tɔŋ]
Séance 'séance' [sej'ɐŋs]
Trance 'trance' [tʁɐŋs] (the music genre is [tɹæns]).

Is this common throughout Germany, or is this pronunciation considered rustic?

For me, it depends on the register. If I am speaking in a more formal register, I will use nasalized vowels. If I am speaking to friends or family, I will use vowel+velar nasal. But I would always use [ɔŋks] in Séance [se'jɔŋks] and Trance [tʁɔŋks]. The plosive insertion is a general process for me in these clusters.

As someone whose first language is German, I know that the sentence "Diese Idee wird häufig dazu benutzt, Menschen zu unterdrücken und auszubeuten" (This idea is often used to oppress and exploit people) is, for lack of a better word, "correct" German, while "Diese Idee wird häufig dazu benutzt, Menschen unterzudrücken und auszubeuten" or "Diese Idee wird häufig dazu benutzt, Menschen zu unterdrücken und zu ausbeuten" would both be "wrong".

Thing is, I have no idea why this is so. Could anyone who knows more about the formal rules of the German language enlighten me?

Assuming these two verbs work the same in German as their cognates do in Dutch, it's because ausbeuten is a separable verb whereas unterdrücken isn't.

Dē Graut Bʉr wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:13 pm Assuming these two verbs work the same in German as their cognates do in Dutch, it's because ausbeuten is a separable verb whereas unterdrücken isn't.

Thank you!

Dē Graut Bʉr wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:13 pm Assuming these two verbs work the same in German as their cognates do in Dutch, it's because ausbeuten is a separable verb whereas unterdrücken isn't.

My GCSE German says the same thing. It's the same reason it's Ich unterdrücke, but Ich beute aus

Dē Graut Bʉr wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:13 pm Assuming these two verbs work the same in German as their cognates do in Dutch, it's because ausbeuten is a separable verb whereas unterdrücken isn't.

I know nothing of German, but: welcome back!

How did MHG under (e.g. the name of the famous MHG poem "Under der linden") become NHG unter (e.g. the name of the boulevard in Berlin Unter den Linden)? And why didn't Linden or, say, Kinder or Münder undergo the same change?

I know that the /d/ Münder comes from a dental fricative (compare English mouth), which by default becomes /d/ in Modern High German. The same is actually true for the /d/ in Kinder but not for the /t/ in unter which stens from a /d/ in Proto-Germanic.
I am not sure about Linden though.

Creyeditor wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 2:22 pm I know that the /d/ Münder comes from a dental fricative (compare English mouth), which by default becomes /d/ in Modern High German. The same is actually true for the /d/ in Kinder but not for the /t/ in unter which stens from a /d/ in Proto-Germanic.
I am not sure about Linden though.

I should have known about Münder, but I didn't know that about Kinder (which apparently is cognate with English kin). However, Linden (singular Linde) comes from PGmc *lindō, so presumably it should have become *Linten unless it was under the influence of, say, Low German (MHG had both linde and linte apparently, now that I check, and OHG had linta).

The question, though, is why doesn't the MHG have unter as well? Is this a case of the normative written "standard" for MHG reflecting a different High German variety than the primary East Central German variety from which modern StG arose?

Maybe the sound changes affected function words and lexical words at different rates? Just guessing here, really.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2024 2:39 pmHowever, Linden (singular Linde) comes from PGmc *lindō, so presumably it should have become *Linten unless it was under the influence of, say, Low German (MHG had both linde and linte apparently, now that I check, and OHG had linta).

I suspect Linde was influenced by the adjective lind (from PGmc *linþaz > Eng. lithe).

Interdialectal borrowings and influences are always a possibility

German has two very similar words, "Drache" and "Drachen", for "dragon" and "kite". In some inflected forms, they're even exactly the same. Now I wonder: why is that so? Does it, perhaps, have to do with Chinese culture or the Chinese language?

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2024 2:55 pm German has two very similar words, "Drache" and "Drachen", for "dragon" and "kite". In some inflected forms, they're even exactly the same. Now I wonder: why is that so? Does it, perhaps, have to do with Chinese culture or the Chinese language?

Wiktionary suggests one as an alternate form for the other, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Drache with the 'kite' sense derived from the 'dragon' one.

I wondered about the French cerf-volant 'kite'; (lit. 'flying deer') -- it turns out the etymology is identical (the earlier form was serpe, 'serpent', 'dragon'.)