I'm learning German

[Amazing Rando]

As part of the entrance requirements for my PhD program, I had to pass language exams in three languages- two modern and one ancient. I was in good shape on two of the three, having minored in Spanish in college, and studied heavily in ancient Greek in seminary, but the third language I hadn't even begun yet. I've since passed exams in Spanish and in Greek, and for my third language, I've chosen German since a lot of theological literature is written in German. Anyway, it's been a royal struggle and I'm not very good at disciplined self-study. Here is the first practice passage my professor tossed to me to translate using only a dictionary and no other lexical or grammatic aids:

Ich war zur Ökumene gekommen in den Kriegsgefangenenlagern. Als ich Christ
wurde und zum Glauben kam, fand ich eine Gemeinschaft von Christen vor, und
es war uns egal, ob jemand katholisch, evangelisch, lutherisch oder
freikirchlich war. Die Frage war: bist du Christ oder bist du kein Christ.
Sodass die ökumensiche Gemeinschaft aller Christen in dem Leiden und in den
Verfolgungen den Ursprung der Ökumene darstellt. Auch in Deutschland sind
die ersten ökumenischen Verbindungen in der Zeit der gemeinsamen
Verfolgungen durch die Nazi-Diktatur entstanden. Darauf sollten wir immer
wieder zurückkommen: es ist keine Frage der ökumenischen Konferenzen oder
der Theologie oder der Bischöfe, sondern der Menschen vor Ort. Je mehr die
Christenheit eine Minderheit in einer multireligiösen Gesellschaft wird,
umso mehr müssen wir zueinander kommen. Im Augenblick ist der Zustand der
Ökumene nicht so, wie ich ihn erfahren habe, als ich vor 40 Jahren in die
Ökumenische Bewegung eingetreten bin. Heute betont man wieder stärker die
verschiedenen Profile von Lutheranern und Katholiken, die Verschiedenheit
in der Gemeinschaft, während wir früher die Gemeinschaft in der
Verschiedenheit betont haben. Ich hoffe aber, dass dies unaufhaltsam uns
zueinander führt. Unabhängig davon, ob wir Protestanten oder Katholiken
sind: wir sind in erster Linie Christen.

And here's my ridiculously inadequate translation attempt:

I had come to be ecumenical in the prisoner of war camp. As I came to faith in Christ, I found a community of Christians, and it was ourselves equal, whether someone was Catholic, evangelical, Lutheran, or from a free church. The question was: are you Christ or are you not Christ? So that the ecumenical community of all Christians represented in the sufferings and in the persecutions the beginning to the ecumenism. Also in Germany are the first ecumenical communities which began in the time of the communal persecutions by the Nazi dictator. After that we should have always again return: it is a small question of the ecumenical conferences or of theology or of bishops, to separate the people from the place. Ever more Christendom is becoming a minority in a multireligious society, all the more must we come to one another. In the moment the condition of ecumenism is not so, how I have to experience him, as I have been treading for 40 years in the dying profiles of Lutherans and Catholics, the diversity in the community, while we previously have stressed the community in the diversity. I hope however, that this irresistibly leads us to each other. Independent of that, whether we are Protastents or Catholics: we are in the first line of Christians.

Took me about an hour and a half because I had to stop and look up almost every word, and even then I wasn't able to consistently smooth it out into fluent English, so at points my translation is still in its wooden-literal form. Oy.

[Pilgrim]

That looks hard. I think I'll just stick with what I know. Oy. BTW, good to have lunch with you the other day! Zer Gut!

[JB]

Best of luck to you, Rando! It's been a little while since I stopped studying German, and I feel like I've already forgotten virtually everything I once knew.

The question that always seems to present itself in translation is precisely how "literal" one wants to be. For example, with the second and third sentences, my first inclination would be to render it into English as, "As I became a Christian and came to faith, I found a community of Christians, and to us it didn't matter whether one was Catholic, evangelical, Lutheran, or from a free church. The question was, are you a Christian or a non-Christian?" (Rando's rendering of the first part seems less wooden than mine, but I think my rendering of "es war uns egal" better captures the meaning of the phrase, if memory serves me correctly.)

[Amazing Rando]

Here's my next stab at translating German. Here's the text:

Mit dem sechzigsten Todestag Dietrich Bonhoeffers beginnt eine Zeit, die
in besonderer Weise dazu einlädt, sich seinem Vermächtnis zuzuwenden. Denn
am 4. Februar 2006 wird seines hundertsten Geburtstags zu gedenken sein.
Die Spanne zwischen diesen beiden Erinnerungsdaten kann Anlass sein, sich
Bonhoeffers Leben und Werk neu zu vergegenwärtigen.

Um eine unkritische Aneignung kann es dabei nicht gehen. Vielmehr ist auch
Bonhoeffer gegenüber die wache Kritikfähigkeit angemessen, die er selbst
gegenüber theologischen Lehrern wie Zeitgenossen an den Tag legte. Wäre er
dazu nicht im Stande gewesen, dann enthielte seine Theologie nicht das
Anregungspotential, das sie bis zum heutigen Tag so lebendig macht. Nicht
darum kann es also gehen, Dietrich Bonhoeffer mit der "Aura eines großen
Widerstandszeugen" (K.-M. Kodalle) zu umgeben, um ihn dadurch gegenüber
kritischen Rückfragen zu immunisieren. Sehr wohl aber wird es seinem
Lebenszeugnis wie seiner Theologie gerecht, wenn sechzig Jahre nach seinem
Tod auf ihn angewandt wird, was das Augsburger Bekenntnis von 1530 in
seinem Artikel 21 "von der Verehrung der Heiligen" lehrt. Dieses
grundlegende evangelische Bekenntnisdokument unterscheidet zwischen der
Anrufung von Heiligen, in der Menschen sich mit der Bitte um Beistand an
sie wenden, und einem öffentlichen Gedenken der Heiligen, um von ihrem
Beispiel für den eigenen Glauben und das eigene Handeln zu lernen. Während
das eine evangelischem Glauben nicht entspricht, ist ihm das andere eine
große Hilfe.

And my translation:

With the 60th anniversary of the death of Dietrich Bonhoeffer began a time, which invited in the particular way, turning to his own legacy. Because the 4th of February 2006 becomes the commemorating of his hundredth birthday. The span between both of these commemorative dates can be a reason to envision Bonhoeffer’s life and work itself anew.

It can therefore not go at an uncritical adoption. On the contrary Bonhoeffer is also opposite the appropriate guarding critical faculty, himself opposite theological learning how contemporaries lay on the day. Would he not being at a state thereto, then his theology did not contain the inciting potential, that made it so lively down to the present day. Therefore it cannot go thus, Dietrich Bonhoeffer surrounded with the “Aura of some big resistance testimonies” (K.-M. Kodalle), thus to immunize him from opposing critical further inquiries. However very probably he becomes his own life’s testimony as his theology deserved, when sixty years since his death becomes applied, what the Augsburg Confession of 1530 in its Article 21 “of the worship of the saints” read. These basic evangelical confessional documents distinguished between the invocation of the saints, in the human beings themselves turning to them with the appeal for aid, and some public memories of the saints, at learning from their example for the strange beliefs and the strange trade. While some evangelical beliefs did not correspond, the other is a big help to him.

[Glenn P]

What teaching resource are you primarily using? A textbook?

[FreezBee]

Here's my next stab at translating German. Here's the text:

....

Can I have a go at it?

With the 60th anniversary of the death of Dietrich Bonhoeffer begins a time, which in particular invites an interest in his legacy. That is, because the 4. of February 2006 will be the commemoration of his 100th birthday. The time between both these dates of commemoration could be an invitation for us to reconsider the life and works of Bonhoeffer.

That cannot be an uncritical acceptance. More so is also towards Bonhoeffer, the alert criticism appropriate, that he himself applied towards his contemporary theological teachers. Had he not been able to do that, his theology would not have contained that inspiration that has made it so vivid to this day. Likewise it cannot be that we should surround Ditrich Bonhoeffer with the "aura of a great resistance-witness" (K.-M. Kodalle) in order to protect him against critical examinations. However, it will probably be fitting for the testimony of his life and his theology, if 60 years after his death it is applied to him, what the Augsburg Confession from 1530 teaches in its Article 21 "from the worship of the saints". This fundamental evangelical confessional document distinguishes between the invocation of the saints, towards which people turned with pleads of help, and the public legends of the saints, whereby from their example to learn for one's own faith and one's own acts. While the one is not compatible with the evangelical faith, the other is a great help.

Well, I only have primary school German to boast of, so don't expect the above to be correct


- FreezBee

[Amazing Rando]

What teaching resource are you primarily using? A textbook?

I'm using nothing but a dictionary (not allowed to do my translations with any other grammar aids). I really have very little grasp of the mechanics of the language other than a basic knowledge of verb conjugations, and the fact that if I see a "t" toward the end of the verb it probably means it's in the past tense.

[Amazing Rando]

I like yours a lot better than mine, FreezBee!

[Jezz]

I'm using nothing but a dictionary (not allowed to do my translations with any other grammar aids).

The dictionary should be a really big help if you know how to use it. Most German dictionaries have a list of strong verbs in them to help you with conjugations.

I really have very little grasp of the mechanics of the language other than a basic knowledge of verb conjugations, and the fact that if I see a "t" toward the end of the verb it probably means it's in the past tense.

Hmm, if I could offer you a little piece of advice, it would be to drop this little general rule of yours. It isn't correct. In fact, it got you into trouble in the first sentence of your last translation piece - note how FreezBee's translation uses (correctly) the present tense (begins, invites) whereas yours uses the past (began, invited). The 3rd person singular conjugation of regular (and of many irregular) German verbs always ends with a t in the present tense. The past tense conjugation does not have any plain t endings, to my recollection.

It is true that the past participle (used in the formation perfect tense, as in Spanish) ends in a t (regular verbs only) - but it has other features to distinguish it. It usually starts with "ge", it appears at the end of the clause, and it usually has some form of the helper verb "haben" or "sein" with it to form the perfect/pluperfect/future perfect tense.

[FreezBee]

I like yours a lot better than mine, FreezBee!

Thank you

But as you probably have noticed, I have left it as an exercise to push the words around to get something that looks like proper English sentence structure


- FreezBee

[Teallaura]

It's pretty good for nothing more than a dictionary. Those are some pretty complex sentence structures - which makes them a royal pain in German.

Translations should be faithful but not so poorly constructed in English that you lose meaning.

Hint: look up some common phrases/idioms and see how they are constructed in German. It'll give you a bit more insight into the construction.

It's a good job!

[Teallaura]

...


Hmm, if I could offer you a little piece of advice, it would be to drop this little general rule of yours. It isn't correct. In fact, it got you into trouble in the first sentence of your last translation piece - note how FreezBee's translation uses (correctly) the present tense (begins, invites) whereas yours uses the past (began, invited). The 3rd person singular conjugation of regular (and of many irregular) German verbs always ends with a t in the present tense. The past tense conjugation does not have any plain t endings, to my recollection.

...

There are some that will end in T almost always but it's not from plain past tense conjugation. 'Passieren' (to happen), for example, will end in T a lot of the time regardless of tense.

Es passiert. Es ist passiert. Es hat passiert. Es passiert hatte. Und so weiter....

Then it does change just to throw you off: Es passierte. Es passierend.

But the only plain past tense there is Es passierte.


Unless it means 'to pass' then it gets really sneaky...

Es passierte = it happened.
Es passiert = it passed.


German is sneaky, Rando.

[Jezz]

There are some that will end in T almost always but it's not from plain past tense conjugation. 'Passieren' (to happen), for example, will end in T a lot of the time regardless of tense.

Es passiert. Es ist passiert. Es hat passiert. Es passiert hatte. Und so weiter....

Yes. Apart from the first one (which is 3 person singular, present), the above are instances of the past participle. As I said, the past participle and 3 person singular of all regular verbs ends in "t". The past test does not.

And btw: That ought to be "Es hatte passiert", not "Es passiert hatte". Unless, of course, the phrase was a subordinate clause and not a main clause...

Then it does change just to throw you off: Es passierte. Es passierend.

Yes, that would throw one off. "Es passierend" is not a complete sentence, as it lacks a finite verb. "Passierend" is the present participle.

"Es ist passierend" is grammatically correct (directly equivalent to "It is passing/happening") but isn't used in German. Present participles are usually only used as attributive adjectives - eg, "das passierende Boot" = "the passing boat".

But the only plain past tense there is Es passierte.

Well, there's also:

Du passiertest
Ihr passiertet
Wir/sie passierten

... all of which are simple past tense.

Unless it means 'to pass' then it gets really sneaky...

Es passierte = it happened.
Es passiert = it passed.

I am pretty sure that the last one should be "It passes" (or maybe "it is passing"). "Passiert", when used as a finite verb, is present tense.

[Teallaura]

Yes. Apart from the first one (which is 3 person singular, present), the above are instances of the past participle. As I said, the past participle and 3 person singular of all regular verbs ends in "t". The past test does not.

And btw: That ought to be "Es hatte passiert", not "Es passiert hatte". Unless, of course, the phrase was a subordinate clause and not a main clause...

I know - originally I was going to put it into a clause but didn't and didn't go back and correct it.

Yes, that would throw one off. "Es passierend" is not a complete sentence, as it lacks a finite verb. "Passierend" is the present participle.

"Es ist passierend" is grammatically correct (directly equivalent to "It is passing/happening") but isn't used in German. Present participles are usually only used as attributive adjectives - eg, "das passierende Boot" = "the passing boat".

My dictionary shows it as an intransitive verb. You might be right about needing 'ist' however.

Well, there's also:

Du passiertest
Ihr passiertet
Wir/sie passierten

... all of which are simple past tense.

Not in any of my examples, there wasn't!

I am pretty sure that the last one should be "It passes" (or maybe "it is passing"). "Passiert", when used as a finite verb, is present tense.

No, it's correct - it's a different sense of 'pass' - in this case to pass through instead of to pass by. And yes, it's a really weird conjugation.

[Glenn P]

German is sneaky, Rando.

Indeed. Turn your back for five seconds and they're invading Poland.