The official language thread

Off-topic
41

syllable

42

I thought that Apr was a word and not only a syllable. “Krk” is also a word.

43

Yeah that´s what the Klingons call Captain Kirk.

2 Likes
44

New question about the English language. When do I have to say/can I say:

  • for example
  • in example
  • e.g.
  • i.e.

And what is the difference between those (beside the fact that two of them are abbreviations)?

45

I have never heard “in example” before. Do you have…uh…an example for that?

e.g. means exempli gratia. Which literally means for example.

I.e. means id est. Das heißt, soll/will heißen.

6 Likes
46

Not at the moment, but I’ve heard it (as a synonym for “for example” and not only in sentences like “In example 4.1 you see …”)

btw: With “an example” we have a fourth example variant.

But “f.e.” isn’t a valid abbreviation? So you have to use the Latin one?

47

That is what they do, yes.

Do you mean like in german saying usw. instead of etc.? No I don´t think they do it like that.

1 Like
48

Yes, exactly. :slight_smile:

49

I get the impression that in general they use a lot more latin and french words in english than we do. But that comes naturally with having been occupied* by both at one point or another, just like in our case.

*though the french/english thing in medieval times wasn´t exactly an occupation like in our case.

50

I read a very interesting book by Bill Bryson: The Mother Tongue, which is subtitled English and how it got that way. It explains a bit of history of the English language, how its spelling got *beeped* up during time and other stuff. It obviously needs to be read in English.

It should confirm your impression :smiley:

2 Likes
51

The abbreviation of “for example” is “e.g.” (Which @milanfahrnholz gave the correct Latin origin for)
“In example” is just plain wrong and a wild guess of expanding the abbreviation “i.e”, which is (again as Milan said) the Latin “id est” = this is, this means, meaning.
So if you know the meaning, the difference between both will become clear, i.e. you won’t use “i.e.” any longer where you should have used “e.g.”
Not to worry, lots of native English speakers make the same mistakes (because it is Latin?)

3 Likes
52

Dutch speakers tend to overtranslate the comparative adverb “than”.

In a superlative comparison the correct Dutch adverb to use is “dan” = “than”. Some people (incorrectly) use “als” = “as”, probably influenced by German.
E.g. A is larger than B
A is groter dan B : correct
A is groter als B : incorrect
A ist größer als B : correct in German (I hope)

Also “A is as large as B” = “A is even groot als B” (correct)

Anyway, what a LOT of Dutch speakers do when they have to say “A is groter dan B” in English, is to also “translate” the word “dan” as an adverb of time. Probably because it’s too similar to Dutch otherwise, so surely that can’t be right, right? Yielding this ugly beast:
“A is bigger then B.” (My eyes!! :fire:)

53

Oddly, those same people tend to have no problem to translate “eventueel” to “eventually”. A trait shared with the French (eventuallement).
One means “maybe, perhaps, optionally”, the other means “in the end, bound to happen sooner or later, inevitably”
That must be my single largest frustration with hearing or reading non-native English speakers at work. Even -or especially-when it’s the CEO, I tend to play dumb smart and go “oh, so eventually there will be a bigger bonus for me this year? That’s great!”

1 Like
54

“Eventually” is a beast. In French, Italian, German, Dutch, Spanish the false friend means “probably, possibly”, but nooooo, in English it has to mean something that SURELY happens in the end.

The same goes for “actual”.

1 Like
55

Yeah. I never said English to be the more logical one, but when in Rome…

2 Likes
56

Whooops… I have used “ACTUAL” and “EVENTUALLY” with the italian meaning in mind!

57

Wow, a lot to catch up with in this thread. *deep breath*

I think other people have basically answered the same, but:
for example – when giving example(s) – ‘sandwich fillings, for example, cheese, pickle and ham.’
in example – we don’t use that in the same way as above, only in the sense you mentioned here:

e.g. – same as ‘for example’
i.e. – ‘that is’ – ‘she ate the Milkybar – i.e. the white chocolate bar’

I have that on my shelf :slight_smile: it’s a great read.

Yep, most likely. People rarely use ‘i.e.’ in common writing. At work it’s our house style to write out ‘for example’ too. I’d say you only really find those abbreviations in note-taking or maybe legal documents (conversely!)

I’ve seen Brits do that too (and in speech). WHY I OUGHTA-!

I remember that confusing me in French class. It must be the root of a lot of confusion. I can sort of see how it means both, though.

58

Thanks for the tip! I like these types of books because you understood better why and how the language works.
btw: There are translations? :slight_smile:

Seems so, because there is a scene in “Get Shorty”. :wink:

Correct. :slight_smile:

A lot of Germans do that too - I assume because “than” and “then” sound similar.

Yep. :slight_smile: Beside “actually” we Germans have problems with “become”. This word sounds like “bekommen” = to get something. In school we had the famous counterexample: “he becomes a beefsteak”…

Would you recommend this style (in general/for all non-native speakers)?

Actually no. That’s one reason I asked. :slight_smile: I have to read a lot of articles, (science) papers and blog posts and they prefer the abbreviation(s).

59

Probably, though it depends where it’s being used. I write patient information so it’s important that our language is clear.

Well yeah, those were just examples of what I find to be the case in England. Science papers is the same as what I meant by legal documents – any specialist, formal writing. It’s a bit old-fashioned (and lazy) to use them in standard writing these days.

1 Like
60

I heard a store clerk in Zurich telling a customer “you become 100 euros”. It was very funny.

4 Likes