Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Continue or start your personal language log here, including logs for challenge participants
Kraut
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:37 pm
Languages: German (N)
French (C)
English (C)
Spanish (A2)
Lithuanian
x 3204

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Kraut » Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:03 pm

There are other names in use for cases in German, quite common: "das direkte Objekt" or "das Akkusativ-Objekt" and "das indirekte Objekt" or "das Dativ-Objekt". I have never heard or used "Fall 1", "Fall 2" etc
0 x

User avatar
Chung
Blue Belt
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:39 pm
Languages: SPEAKS: English*, French
STUDIES: Hungarian, Italian, Ukrainian
OTHER: Czech, German, Polish, Slovak
STUDIED: Azeri, BCMS/SC, Estonian, Finnish, Korean, Latin, Northern Saami, Russian, Slovenian, Turkish
DABBLED: Bashkir, Chuvash, Crimean Tatar, Inari Saami, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Lithuanian, Meadow Mari, Mongolian, Romanian, Tatar, Turkmen, Tuvan, Uzbek
x 2309

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Chung » Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:34 pm

Cavesa wrote:A German Grammar Terminology Problem: numbers of the cases. You know, I'd love to stick to the pretty clear names Akkusativ and Dativ. I'd love to. But publishers of coursebooks and grammars think otherwise. They use sometimes numbers instead. The third case, and the fourth case. (The second being Genitiv). The problem is, that they don't always agree which is which, and they also introduce them in various order. Or perhaps they do agree, but they've confused me too much already. And I cannot just let this be, because I need to use one of the number using resources, as I also do a bit of "tutoring" or "co-suffering" with my little sister (nope, language learning at school is never easy for my family. It is always a path of many failures and suffering, with unsure results :-D ). I think the 4th is the Dativ and the 3rd is Akkuzativ. But I am no longer sure of absolutely anything at all. And if I don't want to leave my little sister abandonned during a rather stressful time, I have to use the terminology used by her resources.


This reminds me of one my mini-rants from 10 years ago on the old forum.

On February 23, 2011 at 5:29 pm in “Words to the wise from Holland” at how-to-learn-any-language.com, Chung wrote:I too think that the obsession with Latin as a reference point reflects more a cultural consideration/bias than any pedagogical one, and at best is of limited value when teaching languages that differ substantially from it morphologically, lexically or phonologically. For sure it's not a strict I-E vs. non-I-E thing (which is the study's focus).

This Latin bias in teaching languages has shown up in a couple of places for me ranging from harmless to questionable.

In most of the Slavonic languages that I've studied most intensively, the non-peripheral cases are often presented in local grammar books mimicking the traditional continental European sequence of teaching Latin (as if Latin should be the template of all people who fancy themselves to speak a "civilized" language :-S).

Latin: Nominative, Genetivus, Dativus, Accusativus
Czech, Slovak & Slovenian: "1st case", "2nd case", "3rd case", "4th case"
Polish: Mianownik, Dopełniacz, Celownik, Biernik
Ukrainian: називний, родовий, давальний, знахідний

Czech, Slovak and Slovenian do contain terms for the cases in their own lexicon but the fact that they traditionally assign them in a numerical order and even call them "1st case", "2nd case" etc. aping some arbitrary order handed down from teaching Latin is rather annoying but ultimately not problematic.

However a notable problem with this Latinic bias in language teaching is that I've noticed how many people today get scared off by even the mention of cases altogether (often dredging memories or just hearsay of dreary Latin classes), and so equate number of cases with difficulty or intractability. This has turned up even in discussions here with people initially thinking that Bulgarian is an easy Slavonic language because it lacks cases outside the pronouns or that Hungarian must be next-to-impossible because it has between 18 and 24 cases. Firstly, Bulgarian has tenses, aspects, syntax, lexis and pragmatics. No one here should give it short shrift just because one feature appears "easy" when compared to the organization in a cherished language. Secondly, cases in a typically fusional language like Latin don't work in quite the same way as in a typically agglutinative language like Hungarian with some people comparing some Hungarian case-endings/suffixes to fused postpositions.


I was spared this kind of nonsense with numbering of cases by virtue of having been taught the cases by their names. No teacher ever made much of some sequence. I first encountered the numbering convention when I was using a communist-era Czech textbook, although it also had the name of the cases beside the numbers. Looking back at that time, I would have found it unedifying to be told that to mark a possessor (or a possessed object), I am to use the "second case" rather than genitive or the vocative is to be known as the "fifth case".
4 x

User avatar
Iversen
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 7:36 pm
Location: Denmark
Languages: Monolingual travels in Danish, English, German, Dutch, Swedish, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, Romanian and (part time) Esperanto
Ahem, not yet: Norwegian, Afrikaans, Platt, Scots, Russian, Serbian, Bulgarian, Albanian, Greek, Latin, Irish, Indonesian and a few more...
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1027
x 14962

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Iversen » Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:49 am

I have partly solved the problem by making green sheets, where I can put the cases in whatever order I prefer. And I prefer putting them in the order Nominative, Accusative, Genitive, Dative, followed by everything else like ablatives, locative and instrumentals (and the 'extra' cases used in Finnish and Hungarian, which mostly indicate locations and directions). And yes, I use names, albeit in an abbreviated form to save space. Referring to cases by number is simply foolish because you then have refer back to named cases or vague semantic arguments to making comparisons between languages - maybe even when comparing different grammars for one language, but since I generally avoid using grammars that use numbers I can't refer to any concrete example of this ultimate idiocy.

So why use the Latin order (where at least three separate cases at an early point in time have been compacted into on case, called Ablative)? NOT because it was used in Latin grammars and grammars inspired thereof, but because it is harmless with the Romance (Romanian) and Germanic languages (Icelandic, High German) and it fits the Slavic languages like a glove because the Accusative here to a large extent borrows its forms from the Nominative and the Genitive - so obviously it should stand between these two.

The only case in these languages that really irritates me is the vocative, because it borrows most of its forms from the Nominative, but putting such a rotten lamentable dying and defective case before the mighty Nominative somehow disturbs me, and the accusative already occupies the space after the nominative. So generally I put the vocative somewhere at the end of the list. By the way, in Romance languages like French you might think that the nominative is the survivor - but if you look at the articles etc. then the survivor is actually the 'oblique' case, which was a garbage can for everything except the nominative in Ancient French (which explains why it is 'Grand'Place' in Bruxelles and not *'Grande Place').

As for the verbs I try to maintain a uniform system across languages, but only when the languages themselves don't contradict this. Which means that I think 'present' in all languages I know (apart from Indonesian) even though my Russian grammars insist that there ain't no present for the perfective verbs - the reason being that because of their punctual semantics the form in question acquires a futuristic meaning for perfective verbs. Of course I refuse to take such arguments seriously: there are totally parallel forms for both perfective and impoerfective verbs, and there is no better name than the 'present' for that form. Why introduce confusion in the terminology just to reflect a predictable semantic quirk? Similarly I think of simple perfects as either 'perfects' and 'imperfect' when there are two forms (with each its own semantics), but 'preterite' or 'past tense' when there only is one simple past tense as Danish. With the Slavic languages I tend to use therm 'past tense' for the Russian simple form, because I then can use the same name for the compound forms (with a form of a 'to be'-verb plus a past active participle) in the other Slavic languages (including Polish, where the two have merged into one word).

I could continue a long time with such arcane elucubrations, but the crux of the matter is that the use of numbered cases (or numbered anything else) NEVER is OK, and that case etc. names based on Latin have turned out to be useful for many other languages, so as long as you don't expect these languages to conform to Latin grammar on any other points. The next best solution (for people who don't have to sonsider more than one or two target languages) being to use descriptive names, however I have to add to this last choice that several traditional naming systems lack any shred of logic to such a degree that they only deserve to be rejected in toto. The least you can expect from a naming system is that it is as simple and regular and logical as possible - in spite of having to reflect a complicated state of affairs in the real world.
5 x

Cavesa
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4960
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:46 am
Languages: Czech (N), French (C2) English (C1), Italian (C1), Spanish, German (C1)
x 17566

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Cavesa » Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:03 pm

gsbod wrote:You know you're a language nerd when you find yourself searching through every German text you own to see how they deal with information about cases, even though that's all stuff you learned and internalised years ago... :lol:

Everything I've got uses terms based on the Latin case names (either in English or German). Hammer's German Grammar (bilingual English/German) is the only one I have which switches the order in the table to have genitive before dative, everything else is consistent.

I am genuinely curious as to how the case information is presented with numbers in Themen Aktuell - are there any examples you can share?

It is annoying when inconsistent use of terminology gets in the way of learning. I remember one text, possibly the Practice Makes Perfect series, describing das Perfekt as "present perfect" which is incredibly confusing, particularly if you start comparing it to use of the present perfect in English. Past tenses in German are actually pretty straightforward to deal with, especially compared to the Romance languages.


An example from Themen: "U podstatných jmen rodu ženského a středního je tvar členu nebo zájmena v 1. a 4. pádu jednotného čísla shodný". "Na předmět ve 4.pádu se ptáme Was? Wen?". "V češtině používáme po výrazech množství 2.pád, v němčině následuje podstatné jméno v 1.pádu bez členu"-

An approximate translation to English (I haven't seen the English version of the Arbeitsbuch, it's probably nicer): "The 1st and 4th case of nouns, article, or pronoun in feminine or neuter singular are the same". "We ask about the object in the 4.th case with Was? Wen?". "In Czech, we use the 2nd case after the expressions of amount, but in German a noun in the 1st case follows without an article".

So, the numbers really get confusing. And add to it that the learner can consult this in such resources:
A-Grammatik or Klipp und Klar: the order is Nominativ, Akkusativ, Dativ, Genitiv
Grammatik Aktiv: Nominativ, Akkusativ, Dativ (Genitiv not in the same tables)
or any traditionally ordered grammar: Nominativ, Genitiv, Dativ, Akkusativ

Yes, the multilingual grammar terminology is horrible too :-D :-D :-D I am sure I must have complained about that already in the past.
.................
Iversen wrote:I have partly solved the problem by making green sheets,

Over the two decades spend in schools, I found that making my own references was a waste of time in my case. I was spending a lot of time on that, and the effect on memory was not too great. And only the content of the brain counts, not the paper. However, I have no doubts your green sheets are great and that many learners profit from making such overviews. But I've found that using premade tools (such as a nice grammar book) saves me a ton of time, and allows me to just learn.

So why use the Latin order (where at least three separate cases at an early point in time have been compacted into on case, called Ablative)? NOT because it was used in Latin grammars and grammars inspired thereof, but because it is harmless with the Romance (Romanian) and Germanic languages (Icelandic, High German) and it fits the Slavic languages like a glove because the Accusative here to a large extent borrows its forms from the Nominative and the Genitive - so obviously it should stand between these two.

EXACTLY! It is the most universal system for the european languages! We should not abandon Latin just out of misplaced desire for easier learning or something.

I could continue a long time with such arcane elucubrations, but the crux of the matter is that the use of numbered cases (or numbered anything else) NEVER is OK, and that case etc. names based on Latin have turned out to be useful for many other languages, so as long as you don't expect these languages to conform to Latin grammar on any other points. ... The least you can expect from a naming system is that it is as simple and regular and logical as possible - in spite of having to reflect a complicated state of affairs in the real world.

YES! Latin is still the most descriptive and elegant language for terminology of anything imho. It is so sad, that we often try to get rid of it for foolish reasons.
1 x

Cavesa
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4960
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:46 am
Languages: Czech (N), French (C2) English (C1), Italian (C1), Spanish, German (C1)
x 17566

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Cavesa » Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:26 pm

So, on a totally unrelated not to the case numbers (which have been discussed thoroughly, thanks to everybody! You really cleared some things up for me, and made my rant efficient and cathartic in the best sense!!!)

I've made a list of resources I've got, and a sort of a plan to learn German. I need to get rid of stuff that is not too efficient. I need to combine things in a way, that one element supports another. And of course, it all needs to be very CEFR oriented, because the goal is a B2 exam, not enjoyment. :-(

1.CEFR oriented coursebooks: DaF kompakt is a good choice. I am pondering whether or not to supplement it with Assimil, perhaps I could, but it should not be a priority. After DaF kompakt, I think Sicher B1+ and B2 will be good. I have discarded Themen (I use it just when my sister consults something with me, I had completed it before), and also two good Czech based coursebooks, that I don't have time for.

2.Premade SRS. There is no point at all in trying to create many cards of my own. It takes so much time, it is extremely annoying, and it is the number 1 reason behind most of my SRS abandons. Speakly is good, the DaF kompakt course on Memrise is good (curiously, the Spanish based ones is much better than the English based one, the hints and translations are much better. But they are made by the same person! And btw, I'll probably just ignore that they are not totally complete, I'll hope they contain everything important). The 4000 words are definitely enough for B1, hopefully for a large part of B2

3.Grammar Workbooks. An extremely efficient thing to do. I am still considering how efficient is doing the scriptorium with all the mistakes, but I'll probably stick to it. I have discarded a few that I don't like. I am keeping A-Grammatik (it is probably the best! and B Grammatik follows), Grammatik aktiv, Klipp und Klar, and possible Cvičebnice Německé Gramatiky (but this one only if time allows).

4.A little bit of normal media: for reaching B2, it is not crutial. But it could be helpful, so at least one dubbed tv series and a book might be nice.

5.Speechling for pronunciation practice. I really like this form of tutoring, as I have already described. No nonsense, real progress.

6.Exam preparatory books, when I am near the exam.

I am doing quite fine on Speakly, I have forgotten almost all the normal vocab from DaF kompakt, so that is a bit hard. A Grammatik is great. and I almost fear to open the main cousebook. This seems hopeless, but it can't be. I need the job in Germany, unless a miracle happens and the Belgians accept me.
6 x

gsbod
Blue Belt
Posts: 839
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2015 3:22 pm
Location: UK
Languages: English (native)
German (advanced)
French (intermediate)
Japanese (intermediate)
Spanish (learning)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?t=1152
x 2900

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby gsbod » Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:12 pm

On the CEFR coursebooks, if you like A Grammatik, I would give serious consideration to Erkundungen B2 when you are ready. It also aligns nicely with the Goethe Zertifikat exams.

I had a detailed discussion with my husband about German coursebooks over dinner since he used the Sicher books with a class. He did like the Sicher books, and rated them better than Aspekte Neu. I rate Aspekte Neu better than he does (but it's horses for courses I guess), however we both agreed we preferred Erkundungen overall.
3 x

Cavesa
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4960
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:46 am
Languages: Czech (N), French (C2) English (C1), Italian (C1), Spanish, German (C1)
x 17566

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Cavesa » Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:22 pm

gsbod wrote:On the CEFR coursebooks, if you like A Grammatik, I would give serious consideration to Erkundungen B2 when you are ready. It also aligns nicely with the Goethe Zertifikat exams.

I had a detailed discussion with my husband about German coursebooks over dinner since he used the Sicher books with a class. He did like the Sicher books, and rated them better than Aspekte Neu. I rate Aspekte Neu better than he does (but it's horses for courses I guess), however we both agreed we preferred Erkundungen overall.


That's an excellent idea, thanks. I still have time to pick my post B1 coursebooks, but if you agree that Erkundungen are the best (which adds to other good reviews from successful German learners), it's easy to decide. I didn't pick the previous Begegnungen series, because I needed something more concise. Well, DaF kompakt is that in theory, but not with my breaks so far :-D
0 x

User avatar
Chung
Blue Belt
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:39 pm
Languages: SPEAKS: English*, French
STUDIES: Hungarian, Italian, Ukrainian
OTHER: Czech, German, Polish, Slovak
STUDIED: Azeri, BCMS/SC, Estonian, Finnish, Korean, Latin, Northern Saami, Russian, Slovenian, Turkish
DABBLED: Bashkir, Chuvash, Crimean Tatar, Inari Saami, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Lithuanian, Meadow Mari, Mongolian, Romanian, Tatar, Turkmen, Tuvan, Uzbek
x 2309

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Chung » Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:02 am

Cavesa wrote:
gsbod wrote:On the CEFR coursebooks, if you like A Grammatik, I would give serious consideration to Erkundungen B2 when you are ready. It also aligns nicely with the Goethe Zertifikat exams.

I had a detailed discussion with my husband about German coursebooks over dinner since he used the Sicher books with a class. He did like the Sicher books, and rated them better than Aspekte Neu. I rate Aspekte Neu better than he does (but it's horses for courses I guess), however we both agreed we preferred Erkundungen overall.


That's an excellent idea, thanks. I still have time to pick my post B1 coursebooks, but if you agree that Erkundungen are the best (which adds to other good reviews from successful German learners), it's easy to decide. I didn't pick the previous Begegnungen series, because I needed something more concise. Well, DaF kompakt is that in theory, but not with my breaks so far :-D


Já taky doporočuju
0 x

Cavesa
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4960
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:46 am
Languages: Czech (N), French (C2) English (C1), Italian (C1), Spanish, German (C1)
x 17566

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Cavesa » Tue Jun 29, 2021 11:03 am

Good, so now I just need to get to B1 first, to follow on this recommendation :-D :-D :-D

It's funny how much of a difference can a different base language of an SRS course make. The Spanish based DaF kompakt is much more fun than the English based one (this is subjective, but important), and it is much better done, the synonymes or similar meanings are much better set apart! It is possible that the author of both courses simply prefered the Spanish based one and put more effort into it. I progress quite well, hope to to cover the first 8 units (=the A1 level within the coursebook) till the end of the week.

And I found my first tv series in German. I love Star Trek. But I simply couldn't switch a known one from English to German, it feels superweird to hear the different voices. So, I've started Star Trek Voyager, which I don't know yet. I can follow the main plot, I need to review some shorter bits, sometimes I switch from the German subtitles to the English ones for a moment, to clear up something. They speak superfast, the series even starts with a battle situation :-D It should work nicely and do the job.
5 x

Cavesa
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4960
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:46 am
Languages: Czech (N), French (C2) English (C1), Italian (C1), Spanish, German (C1)
x 17566

Re: Back to the roots and water them with coffee

Postby Cavesa » Thu Jul 01, 2021 12:19 am

I'm continuing rather fast with the Speechling curriculum and plan to apply this wonderful tip from Lingua:
lingua wrote:For German I'm using some of the dialogs from Assimil. For Italian I do different things. Most recently I was doing a lot of sentences with pronominal verbs because they don't roll off my tongue. Mostly I look for sentences from whatever it is I'm reading when I come across phrases/sentences/words that I am less fluid with. When you do free form you have to enter the words into a box so the tutor knows what you're trying to say.

That's what I'll do with some stuff, possible even the Assimil texts.

I'm continuing nicely with the Memrise DaF kompakt deck, 468 words and quickly progressing. The Spanish base is great, I no longer make mistakes in Urlaub machen/fahren, because there is no confusion in the hint! But right now, I've gotten to "agujetas" as "Muskelkater". I have a lot to learn, fortunately I really love Spanish and it is making German more bearable. :-)

Btw I've fallen in love with Learning Languages with Netflix. It shows double subtitles (good at my low level German), it also moves both lines of subtitles a bit apart from the main film part, so that's less tempting to read, and one can even print out the subtitles! Considering my failure with finding transcripts, it's awesome!

But you know what is funny? Since the switch to German, I don't feel that much like watching Start Trek (which I've been pretty addicted to recently, until this change). So, let's see who wins. My inner fangirl, or the dislike for German. :-D
6 x


Return to “Language logs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests