German questions

[bradrn]

What were the earliest direct ancestors of Modern German from which some known texts have survived?

There are inscriptions in Proto-Germanic.

Not sure those count as ‘texts’, though. Looks like the oldest long-form texts are from Old High German.

(Besides, it looks like the ‘Proto-Germanic’ inscriptions are more Proto-Norse, rather than Proto-West Germanic.)

[Travis B.]

(Besides, it looks like the ‘Proto-Germanic’ inscriptions are more Proto-Norse, rather than Proto-West Germanic.)

What about the Negau helmet?

[bradrn]

(Besides, it looks like the ‘Proto-Germanic’ inscriptions are more Proto-Norse, rather than Proto-West Germanic.)

What about the Negau helmet?

You have a point there. (Though my other point stands — that’s only two or three words.)

[Raphael]

Thank you, sounds like I have to look at this more in-depth.

[Travis B.]

I have seen people say that pronouncing StG <w> /v/ with the sound of English [v] is incorrect, and that StG /v/ is "between w and v", yet the only way this makes sense to me is if StG /v/ were really [ʋ] or [β], but I have not seen anyone actually transcribe it this way, unlike with Standard Dutch, where I have seen <w> transcribed as either [ʋ] or [β], with [ʋ] being most common. Note though that I have seen Low Saxon <w> specifically being mentioned as having been historically [β], with [v] being a pronunciation under StG influence.

Anyone have any clue about this?

[Raphael]

Sorry, I don't really know enough about varieties of German other than what I speak myself to answer this question. That is, I'm not even sure what exactly the theoretically expected StG pronunciation is in this case.

That said, this reminds me that, back in school, decades ago, a young British exchange teacher told us in English class that pronouncing English <v> exactly like a German <w> (not sure about the proper IPA) would be somewhat incorrect and would clearly mark you as German, and that a "proper" English <v> would be a bit different, in a way I didn't quite understand back then.

[Travis B.]

I find when I say things in German I tend to pronounce /v/ as something like [ʋ], but I could be wrong (I have little to no contact with native spoken German IRL, and while I have known a number of native German-speakers over the years, I'd always speak with them in English).

[jal]

I have seen people say that pronouncing StG <w> /v/ with the sound of English [v] is incorrect, and that StG /v/ is "between w and v", yet the only way this makes sense to me is if StG /v/ were really [ʋ] or [β], but I have not seen anyone actually transcribe it this way, unlike with Standard Dutch, where I have seen <w> transcribed as either [ʋ] or [β], with [ʋ] being most common.

[ʋ] is Netherlands Dutch, [β] is Flemmish Dutch. As for German, I don't think Netherlands Dutch speakers of German would use anything besides [ʋ], and to me German /v/ sounds like [ʋ].


JAL

[hwhatting]

[ʋ] is Netherlands Dutch, [β] is Flemmish Dutch. As for German, I don't think Netherlands Dutch speakers of German would use anything besides [ʋ], and to me German /v/ sounds like [ʋ].

I remember when learning Dutch that the textbook mentioned that Dutch had [ʋ] and that that was different from German. So German definitely doesn't have [ʋ] for "w". What it has is and how exactly it differs from English is hard for me to say; I'm notoriously bad at hearing such nuances (one of the reasons why phonetics is the most un-intuitive part of linguistics to me).

[Travis B.]

That said, this reminds me that, back in school, decades ago, a young British exchange teacher told us in English class that pronouncing English <v> exactly like a German <w> (not sure about the proper IPA) would be somewhat incorrect and would clearly mark you as German, and that a "proper" English <v> would be a bit different, in a way I didn't quite understand back then.

A far worse offense is turning English <v> into /w/ as it seems Germans are so wont to do.

[Raphael]

Is there an etymological relation between Low German (and maybe some other varieties as well ) tüdeln and English toddler?

[jal]

Is there an etymological relation between Low German (and maybe some other varieties as well ) tüdeln and English toddler?

I'd say there isn't. Tüdeln/tüddeln is a dialectical word meaning "to fumble", and like many dialectical words the origin is unknown (though Wiktionary says it's from "tüdern"/"tüdeln", "to wind"). "toddler" apparently comes from "to toddle" ("to waddle") and is dialectical Scottish/Northern English, possible derived from "to totter" ("swing to and fro") with contamination of "waddle".

So there's no overlap in meaning, nor, it seems, form.


JAL

[Raphael]

I'd say there isn't. Tüdeln/tüddeln is a dialectical word meaning "to fumble", and like many dialectical words the origin is unknown (though Wiktionary says it's from "tüdern"/"tüdeln", "to wind"). "toddler" apparently comes from "to toddle" ("to waddle") and is dialectical Scottish/Northern English, possible derived from "to totter" ("swing to and fro") with contamination of "waddle".

So there's no overlap in meaning, nor, it seems, form.


JAL

Thank you!

[jal]

Thank you!

Thank you too, it's always fun to google a bit for etymologies :).


JAL

[Raphael]

How would you express this concept in German?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foil_(narrative)

As you can see, it doesn't have a corresponding German Wikipedia article.

Given that Germans of a certain level of education sometimes love to contrast their own cultural sophistication with the supposed philistine barbarism of the English-speaking world, it would be somewhat amusing if there would be a fairly important literary concept for which there is a word in English but not in German.

[Ares Land]

Wiktionary suggests Kontrastfigur. Does that work?

(Each Wikipedia language is basically a separate project, at least as I understand it. So it’s pretty bad for that sort of cross-linguistic search.)

[Raphael]

Wiktionary suggests Kontrastfigur. Does that work?

(Each Wikipedia language is basically a separate project, at least as I understand it. So it’s pretty bad for that sort of cross-linguistic search.)

Yes, the semantic elements sound right, and so does the explanation at the Duden website. Thank you!