On language, linguistics and new beginnings

A recent decision I made was to pursue further education in the form of a distance learning program in forensic linguistics. What is forensic linguistics? I’ll come to that soon enough. First I'll summarize my academic background to show how I came to be interested in this burgeoning field of study.

At university I studied law and society and sociocultural linguistics. I must admit from a relatively young age I thought I was hearing a call to the bar, but as the financial realities of such aspirations became more evident, specifically in a post financial crisis economy, I found other ways to make a living. To say that I learned about the law and language would be oversimplifying. I learned about how people use them while considering their unique backgrounds, experiences and motivations and how all that could be used to explain certain actions or phenomena. I’ve constructed a dialogue of how Henry David Thoreau, Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau would respond to the Weather Underground movement and I’ve analyzed a conversation between four university students wherein the female and male participants refer to one location with different terms, namely ‘the market,’ and ‘the store,’ and which linguistic devices were used to argue in favor of one term's liegitimacy over the other across the two genders. Incidentally, it was after writing the paper on that conversation I decided to add linguistics as a second major after receiving encouragement from someone who would eventually become my favorite linguistics professors.

I can remember a moment of clarity in my third year when my seemingly unconventional double major choice suddenly made sense to me. Sitting in a human rights law class, listening to the professor (another one of my favorites) talk about the then newly waged ‘war on terror’ along with ‘enemy combatants’ and ‘enhanced interrogation tactics.’ At the time, lest they appear unpatriotic, it seemed to me that people were more invested in supporting the troops than questioning the way information was gathered, how detainees were being treated or whether the military’s conduct complied with the Geneva Conventions. But more than that, the language used was such that it made the actions described thereby seem mitigated. Using these words, which were not previously a part of our lexicon, provided a new framework for people to use to evaluate what was happening. This war is unlike any other war in that it is not being fought in a single location, but rather the world over, even at home. There is no one identifiable group, but rather a widespread network of individuals that are being dealt with. 

In that context, it would appear to follow that such new circumstances would also facilitate the use of new words to classify what was going on and who was doing what to whom. In that moment I realized how integral language is to shaping an individual's perception. What seems more troubling is how this principle is not only recognized by some in influential positions, but how it can be manipulated to achieve a desired reaction to something without you even being the wiser. As an example of this you need look no further than a commercial break the next time you watch TV.

Linguistics as a discipline involves a number of subfields. There’s phonetics and phonology, how sounds of a language are articulated (using the tongue, teeth, lips etc.) and how these sounds come together to create meaning in a language. There’s morphology which, crudely described, is how words are assembled within a language. Take for example the English suffix –ed, which by itself has no meaning until attached to the end of a (regular) verb, thus creating the past tense. To further highlight phonology, consider the difference between walked and waited: both end in –ed but are pronounced differently. If you’re interested in seeing how other languages work, check this out. There’s syntax, which studies how sentences are formed within a language. Semantics deals with meaning-consider the words “a heavy metal detector.” Is it a device that detects heavy metals or a particularly weighty metal detector? Did you just re-read those words placing different stress on heavy and metal? There’s another example of phonetics. Pragmatics deals with context and its ability to infuse meaning into a phrase which, on its surface, has little to do with what’s going on. Imagine you and your friend have just finished a nice lunch, the check has arrived and your friend looks in their bag then says “Oh, I seem to have forgotten my wallet.” Without even knowing it, you understand this declaration to be an implied request from your friend to cover the bill this time due to their absent mindedness. There are other subfields but I think that list will suffice for now. 

Sociolinguistics is a form of descriptive linguistics, which means it examines and analyses how language is used and what its affects are within a population considering such factors as race, age, gender, socioeconomic status, educational background or religion; all while considering the norms that govern social interaction and structure relationships within society. In my last upper division class at UCSB, Asian American experiences with language, I wrote a paper analyzing the use of a particular variety of English, technically referred to as African American Vernacular English (AAVE), more widely known as ebonics. I took into account the recognized associations with that particular variety of English. These associations are manifold and contain both positive and negative connotations. From the hypermasculinity and coolness of hip hop culture and rap music, to its perception by many as a bastardized form of standard English and ties to criminal activity through the aforementioned music, films and representations of those who speak it. My paper dealt with analyzing the use of so-called tokens (examples) of AAVE being used in the film Better Luck Tomorrow, which boasts a mostly Asian American cast and is based on actual events. I argued (with considerable help from the work of other linguists) that these examples served a greater purpose than just Asian dudes trying to sound black. Whether it was dropping g's, yo mama jokes or use of the ever-controversial "N word," (though it should be noted in this film it was the version with an "a" at the end, not an "er") these tokens served, in my opinion, to construct an identity that challenges normative expectations and understandings of the experience of Asian American boys in high school given their [AAVE tokens'] previously mentioned social connotations and the absence of an Asian American variety of English. Of course I recognize that the dialogue I was analyzing was entirely scripted, thus lacking a certain degree of authenticity. However, I still think that representations in film and media are relevant to sociological inquiry and their role in shaping the linguistic practices, and perhaps by extension the consciousness, of speakers cannot be overlooked.

Forensic linguistics is is the application of linguistic knowledge, methods and insights to the forensic context of law, language, crime investigation, trial, and judicial procedure. The field’s origins can be traced to a case from the 1950s in England (John Olsson, 2009, Introduction). A more recent example caught my eye with the announcement that J.K. Rowling had published a novel under a pseudonym.

I acknowledge that after all that I have barely come to scratch the surface of what forensic linguistics is. This is because I am still a novice to the field. I have been reading more and more trying to familiarize myself with other cases and applications, but this is only the beginning of the process. Given the increasingly technological aspect of daily life and the various social media that is being used to document it in an unprecedentedly public manner, the field is becoming more and more relevant, providing opinions that play a part in the decisions rendered in judicial procedings. I look forward to beginning the program in October, as well as an upcoming week-long conference to be held here in Germany next month. Perhaps I’ll have more to talk about then!

Below is a list of works cited in my paper on the use of AAVE and its social implications in the film Better Luck Tomorrow.

"Ich nehme ein Bierchen."

Prior to the meeting I had last week with the company regarding the new course, there had been ongoing email and phone correspondence between myself and the woman who was coordinating everything. Naturally, the correspondence was first auf Sie, then after we met face to face we were auf Du. Trying to agree on a time is always a bit of an ordeal, coordinating the schedules of various people each with their own engagements can be a challenge, and sometimes it requires that one or more people make a bit of a sacrifice in order to finalize arrangements. In the phone conversation the week before we met, we suggested various days and times where we could all meet. I first proposed Tuesday, but that was ruled out, as some of the participants were to be out of the office on that day. The woman then suggested Wednesday, I was a bit hesitant about that day as I have a course in the morning until 10 and am back home at 11, but have a class in the afternoon and like a little room between engagements, so I suggested Thursday morning, which for me was free. This was also not possible for the group. I asked how long the meeting was expected to run, to which she responded, “ein Stündchen,” (about an hour, or a little hour). I decided in the interest of being agreeable, I should just eat my lunch on the go and agree to Wednesday at noon, which is what we ended up doing.

I got to thinking about this concept of diminutive or smaller forms of things, a grammatical structure, which assigns a change in meaning from the original root form, in this case from “eine Stunde,” to, “ein Stündchen.” Many languages have examples of diminutive forms. Spanish has (to name one example) the –ito/-ita suffixes (masculine and feminine), used to modify nouns in this case to indicate smallness (perrito for perro [dog], burrito for burro [donkey] or señorita for señora [woman]) or endearment such as in nicknames [Juanito for Juan, Lupita for Lupe]. Italian has (among many others) –ino/-ina, as in telefonino [cell phone] from telefono, or singorina from signora to indicate smallness. Diminutives are not as common in English. We’ve borrowed some from the French (-ette [cigarette from cigar]), although by now cigarette is its own word and entity so in this case it’s not as clearly a diminutive form. However if there is something that’s trending (I’ll get to that one in a moment) I feel it would be the –ish suffix, which is now liberally peppered in daily interaction, “It’s a smallish car,” “I’ve got reddish brown hair.” Today when I asked a student what he did over the long weekend he replied, “Couching,” to which I assumed he meant hanging out on the couch. I tried to think of other cases where nouns become verbs and thought of these recent trends you hear of, “planking,” “owling,” etc. There’s also shopping or looting to be considered, as well as dating and schooling. 

The diminutive form in German is very functional and pervades many aspects of day-to-day interaction. It is used primarily to express size of something, namely smallness. There is Brötchen (roll) from Brot (bread) or Häuschen (hut?) from Haus (house). One thing I learned while researching is that diminutive forms are always (German with its rules! English on the other hand, is a language of exceptions, not rules) neutral (das). This answers a frequently asked question of why der Jung (a young boy) is masculine, but das Mädchen (a young girl) is neutral, as it is a diminutive form of die Maid (a maid[-en?]). 

The diminutive does more than indicate size, it can also be used to make something sound a bit nicer. For example, “ein Stündchen,” sounds much more manageable than, “eine Stunde.” And what harm will “ein Bierchen,” instead of “ein Bier,” do on your lunch break? Or when taking a second (or third) piece of cake and requesting “ein Eckchen,” instead of “eine Ecke,” (corner) even though it is not necessarily any smaller than the other corner piece. Or perhaps when you’re spontaneously invited for, “ein Käffechen,” instead of “eine Kaffee,” you visualize the whole affair as not taking that much of your time. Indeed I myself find a “Hallöchen,” a bit sweeter than a “Hallo!” 

Diminutives are also no stranger to the animal kingdom. There’s das Kaninchen (bunny rabbit [domesticated]), which is its own entity now, and not necessarily related to das Kanin. A Bärchen suddenly sounds less ferocious than a Bär (bear), seen in the beloved German snack Gummibärchen (gummy bears). Or as I heard a group of children singing in the park, “Alle meine Entchen (from die Ente [duck]) Schwimmen auf dem See, Köpfchen (from der Kopf [head]) in das Wasser, Schwänzchen (from der Schwanz [tail] in die Höh.” It sounds so much cuter when you picture ducklings with their little headsies in the water and tiny tailsies in the air.

Well, that’s all for today!
Tschüsschen! (from the German goodbye or “Tschüss”)

ein Ghettoblaster

I had a meeting yesterday with a company to discuss a proposed course they want to start. It’s a group of lawyers and they want to learn legal English. Since I moved here I’ve had the opportunity to work with a lot more interesting and specialized areas of English than I did when I taught in California, at times it’s challenging but more often than not I enjoy it. It’s a relatively small group, about five people. They asked at the onset if we should speak in English or German and I felt that German was more appropriate as it is often easier to explain what you want out of a language course in your native language than in the one you want to train. We were talking about which books would be best and on which areas they want to concentrate. At one point, as each person was stating what they expect out of the course, one of the participants asked how he should address me, Du or Sie, I said Du.

After everyone had talked about what they want to focus on and once we’d agreed on a day and time, the coordinator asked me what I require when giving a lesson. I looked around the conference room and saw basically everything I needed, and then said it would be nice if they could provide something that can play CDs, whether it’s a laptop or stereo. Sometimes I have to bring my own to lessons, which isn’t that big a deal, but it would be nice not to have to schlep it around. The other participants looked around the room to see if there was a speaker system or CD player and then one person suggested that we could just use “ein Ghettoblaster.” Had I heard this from a student at the university I would have just considered it another token of using an English phrase, but in this conference room I was a bit surprised. The others agreed that it was a viable option and then I interjected, “Sagt man echt ‘Ghettoblaster’?” (Do people really say ‘ghettoblaster’?) To which he told me that yes, they in fact do.


I asked my German about it later that evening. Apparently it’s true, you can refer to a portable sound system as a ghettoblaster. When I was asked how I would call it (“ein Ghettoblaster”) in English, and I acknowledge that this term may date me a bit, I said either CD player or maybe boom box. To me (and I swear when I described a ‘ghetto blaster’ I used almost verbatim the definition from urban dictionary before having checked it), a ghetto blaster is a big radio, which can play cassettes (not CDs), and is usually seen outdoors or being carried on one shoulder. It’s a specific kind of sound system, but I wouldn’t have thought that the one I use (which has a plug, not batteries, and plays CDs, not cassettes) would have fit into this category. You learn something new every day!

Continuously Present

When you start really learning German, you have to try to come to terms with the numerous verb tenses and which times they refer to. There are, similar to English, several tenses for the past (past simple, past perfect, present perfect), there’s a future (I will do that tomorrow) and future perfect (I will have finished this post by tonight). There are also conditional forms to express what may happen or what may have happened. Then there’s the present tense. One thing that English has which German doesn’t is a present continuous tense. In English you say, “I’m wearing jeans and a shirt,” whereas in German you say, “Ich trage eine Jeans und ein T Shirt” (I wear jeans and a shirt)

In English, the present simple is used to describe states and routines. I am from California. I like to write about languages. I brush my teeth every morning. I take the trash out on Thursdays. The present continuous tense is used to describe something that is happening either in the moment of speaking (“What are you doing?”), or at a specific point in the future (“I’m going to the dentist tomorrow.”) In German, the present tense is also used to describe states and routines. Ich komme aus Kalifornien. Ich schreibe gerne über Sprachen. Ich putze jeden Morgen die Zähne. Ich bringe die Müll Donnerstags aus.

As a native speaker of English I found it at first a bit constrictive that I suddenly lost this mode of expression in German, namely, to talk about something that is unequivocally happening in the here and now. The closest thing is the adverb “gerade,” which in English is similar to, “just,” as in I’ve just done something. You can use this, for example if you answer the phone and want to describe what you are doing at the moment, “Ich putze gerade die Zähne,” although it would be pretty awkward if you answered the phone while brushing your teeth. Anyway, the upshot is that in German you are pretty much limited to the present simple to describe something that happens regularly as well as something that is happening in the moment.

But actually the present simple (fachsprachlich: Präsens) is a bit more multi-functional than it may seem at first glance. Similar to English, the present tense can also be used to talk about the future. As previously mentioned, in English it’s the present continuous that refers to the future, not the present simple. For example, you’re going out with a group of people, everyone is in the car and you are just walking out the front door, it is possible to say “Ich komme!” (in English “I’m coming!”) instead of using the future tense “Ich werde kommen!” Obviously it’s a bit easier, as a non-native speaker I am still not so good with the various forms of the auxiliary verb “werden” in the future, and people understand what you mean. It’s also possible to describe my upcoming vacation plans using the present tense, “Ich fliege im November nach Kalifornien,” instead of saying, “Ich werde im November nach Kalifornien fliegen.”

But German takes it just a step further; hold onto your hats because the present tense can even be used to refer to the past! I know, I just blew your mind a little. It is not uncommon to see headlines in newspapers with the present tense. It stands to reason that anything that is in the newspaper is in fact from some point in the past, but as a certain kind of journalistic style tactic to keep news fresh, journalists often use the present tense, “Google präsentiert hervorragende Quartalszahlen,” or “Britischer Minister Fox tritt zurück.” (Google presents excellent quarterly results, British Minister Fox resigns). This play with tenses is also visible in English headlines, “Administration drops provision of health overhaul,” “Italy’s Berlusconi survives confidence vote.”

I recently watched a TV program about the German language. It was a kind of panel discussion punctuated with various quiz questions about grammar, new German writing reforms, comma usage, plural forms and foreign words. Among the topics were the German of the younger generation versus older generations and the instruction of German in schools. At one point a panel member, an older and esteemed anchorman (sidebar: people who read the news in Germany are considered to have a certain poise in their delivery with how they convey information), commented on his opinion of English words or phrases that increasingly find their way into the German language. He expressed that for technological topics it isn’t really that big of a deal. For instance the word, “laptop,” is almost universally used instead of the proposed German equivalent “Klapprechner.” But he feels that sometimes English encroaches beyond the topic of media and technology into realms it need (ought?) not to and gave the example of a store that is under construction and to be opened with a sign hanging in the window that says, “Coming soon.”

I suppose if German had a continuous tense it wouldn’t be necessary to borrow one!

Word of the week: Falsche Freunde

Falsche Freunde: Bezeichnet man ein Paar aus einem fremdsprachigen Wort und einem Wort der Muttersprache, das sich in Schrift oder Aussprache ähnelt, jedoch in der Bedeutung deutlich unterscheidet (False Cognates-a pair of: a foreign word and a word of the speaker’s native language that is similar in pronunciation or writing, but differs in meaning)

So by now I’ve talked about how not only using an incorrect article for a noun, but also the pronunciation of that word can also change the meaning. I’ve also talked about English words that have been incorporated into the German language (loan words). I’ve also mentioned briefly that there are even some words that are the same in German and English (Wahre Freunde [Real Cognates]), just with different pronunciation such as: bus, instrument, material, fit, dessert, cousin, radio, ring, zebra, pilot, experiment, blind, arm, finger, person, talent, warm, hunger…the list goes on.

This week I’m going to talk about false cognates, something that occurs in learning any language. Cognates are words with common origins. Take for example the word "night," in English, in Spanish it's "noche," in Italian it's "notte," in German it's, "nacht." In these cases (as a native speaker of English), the words are all at least partially recognizable, based on knowledge of the word in my native tongue, either through spelling or sound, therefore learning (and remembering) the word in the new language isn't entirely difficult. I can't go into the historical linguistic aspect of language change too deeply as I am not informed enough to sufficiently explain how those languages are related and why these spelling changes happen; but a very crude description of cognates is that languages have evolved (and continue to evolve) over time. Think of each family of languages (In the example I gave the family is Indo-European) as a tree, and think of each individual language (English, Spanish, Italian and German) as branches on that tree. All the branches (dialects=twigs on branches?) are clearly distinct entities and yet somehow they are also connected to a common root (language). Fun fact: the word, "cognate," derives from the Latin word for, "relative." That's essentially what cognates are, vestiges that have stood the test of time (linguistic appendices?). 

The problem is, cognates do not always share meaning. As we've seen there are real cognates and false cognates, namely, words that do have the same meaning in both languages and words that don't. There are cases where you think a word in the L2 (whatever foreign language you're learning) may somehow be related to a word in your L1 (native language), but in fact it isn't. This is a false friend, when you mistake a word in the L2, for a word that either sounds the same or is written similarly to a word in your L1, but it has a different meaning than the word in your native language. The first time I remember coming across this concept was when I was learning Spanish back in high school. My teacher told a story of someone who wanted to express how embarrassed they were and used the word “embarazado,” which obviously looks and sounds like the word they were searching for, however this word happens to mean “pregnant,” in Spanish. Other Spanish false friends include “assistir,” which looks like assist, but actually means, “to attend.” Or “recordar,” which means, “to remember,” not record.

Italian is also replete with false friends for native English speakers. Take for example “annoiato,” which means, "bored," not annoyed. Another Italian word for, "bored," is “noioso,” which isn’t noisy, although I suppose some things that are annoying could be noisy. There’s also “educato,” which means “polite,” not educated and “romanzo,” which means “novel,” not romance.  A palazza is just a building, not a palace and a preservativo is a condom, not a preservative [but on balance, I suppose the former does include a measurable amount of preservation].

German has got plenty of false friends for native English speakers like myself. Consider the German word “billion,” which means “trillion,” not billion. And when a German person talks about their “Chef,” they are referring to their boss, not the person who cooks food. You may recall my mentioning the Aachener Dom, which is the Aachen Cathedral, not the Aachen dome (“Kuppel”). “Fotograf,” in German refers to the person who takes the picture, not the picture itself, and to describe someone as “sensibel,” is to call them sensitive, not sensible. “Winken,” means, “wave,” not wink. Don’t mistake the German word “gift,” as something you can give someone on their birthday, as it is actually poison, not a present. When talking to a dermatologist, remember a “Pickel,” is a pimple, not a pickle and while we're on culinary false cognates, when ordering pizza keep in mind that in German “Pepperoni” means hot chilis, not “Salami.” A “Fraction,” in Germany is the English “faction,” not a partial number, and if someone asks you in German for “Rat,” they want advice, not a rodent. There is also the German word “Smoking,” which refers to a tuxedo, not the toxic vice (brings new meaning to those “No Smoking” signs you see, right?). And when in the kitchen if you want to sample what a German person is cooking, remember that “tasten,” means “touch,” not taste.

There are plenty of false cognates to be aware of. I come across more and more Falsche Freunde and Wahre Freunde (band, hotel, stress, partner, etc.) as I continue to fumble my way through this language. But it is an interesting thought that somehow you can trace the lineage of a language just like you can a person back through time.

schwül or schwul? There is a difference...

I think a really good party trick would be to be able to do accents. Have you ever told a story to someone and there came a moment where you could have used a particular accent to give the anecdote a little more authenticity, but you didn’t really know which sounds to use or at least if you did you didn’t land them correctly and then at the end of your attempt you say something to the extent of “Yeah, well I’m not that good at doing accents, but you get the idea.”  That’s kind of how I am.

For a long time I didn’t really notice my accent. It wasn’t until I studied in Ireland, where Irish English was the standard that I noticed I am an American and you can hear it in my accent. For example, I was in a phonetics class [linguistic sidebar: phonetics is the study of sounds in language and how they are perceived and articulated using the different parts of the mouth and throat] and the professor was lecturing on the use of the intervocalic (that means between two vowels) /t/ and /d/ sounds, which in American English is realized as an alveolar tap before unstressed vowels. I know, that probably didn’t make sense. Let me explain, an Irish (or British, Australian or South African for that matter) person would pronounce the words butter or party with a hard /t/ sound, but an American would pronounce the same words with this tap sound (which sounds almost like a /d/, however there is a difference in how the two sounds are articulated). Thus, for speakers of American English, pairs such as ladder/latter, metal/medal, and coating/coding are pronounced the same. The professor asked the class, “Where is my American?” as he knew that I was an exchange student in his class, and asked me to read aloud a list of words which demonstrate this pronunciation (butter, party, bottle…among others) to show the difference. That was the first realization I had about my American accent in an English-speaking context.

Indeed each variety of English has its own features to get used to. The International Dialects of English Archive is a really interesting website. It has catalogued audio clips of both native and non-native speakers of English from virtually all over the world. The speakers first read a story and then tell a personal story so as to show the differences between the varieties of English when someone reads something that is written and speaks naturally. As an English teacher I mostly hear accents of non-native speakers, and have gotten used to the different aspects of them. For instance, once during a speaking exercise in one of my classes a while ago (while I was still teaching in the states) there was a French woman talking to a Korean woman. In the activity students had to talk about what they did over the weekend. The French woman was telling the Korean woman “I ate Italian food.” It is worth noting that some French speakers can have difficulty with the “h” sound in English and sometimes pronounce words that start with “h” without an “h” sound (for example, “is,” instead of “his,” or  “and” instead of “hand.” Likewise they sometimes insert an “h” sound between a word ending with a vowel and another word beginning with a vowel to act as a kind of bridge between the vowel sounds, as is the case in this story.) So when the French woman said, “I ate Italian food,” she was actually saying “I hate Italian food,” and seemed confused when the Korean girl asked with a puzzled expression, “Oh really, why?”

Like most native speakers of English I am able to estimate roughly where another native speaker is from based on their accent (at this point even non-native speakers). For example, I am from California (specifically southern California) and tend to use words such as: dude, totally, like or chill not so much as an affectation, but rather as an unfortunate kind of involuntary reflex. This isn’t to say that all people from [southern] California use those words or that people who aren’t from [southern] California don’t also use those words, but it is a feature that marks how I talk. As an example, I can remember in high school a group of friends and I noticed how often we use “like” when we talk [“She was like ‘What?’ and I was like ‘No way!’ and everything was like totally weird”] and tried ridding ourselves of this quasi tick by slapping or pinching the person when they used it excessively, kind of like aversion shock therapy or something. From what I recall, this didn’t last longer than like a few days. 

Once I moved to a country where English wasn’t the native language, I had another realization about my accent, namely what it means to sound like an American who speaks German. There are plenty of ways to identify an Ami (German word for American). One tell is when they use the wrong article for a noun (feminine [die] instead of neutral [das] or masculine [der] or masculine instead of feminine, etc). Sometimes using the wrong article is just a charming little mistake that shows you’re still new in the language. But sometimes it can change the meaning of a word all together, which depending on the context could be awkward. Take for example der Erbe (heir) and das Erbe (inheritance), das Schild (a sign) and der Shild (shield or shell [like on a turtle]), or das Steuer (helm, steering wheel, controls) and die Steuer (tax).

Another aspect most English speakers struggle with is the pronunciation of umlauts (ä, ö, ü) as these sounds aren’t present in English. The ä and the ö are by now not a problem for me. But a year and a half later I still struggle with the difference between the ü and u sound, and yet again depending on the word, the difference in pronunciation (with an umlaut or without) is not only perceivable, but could result in a change in word meaning. Take for example drücken versus drucken (push versus print). So this difference isn’t that awkward, and like I said, I have difficulty with the ü sound, so it’s unlikely that I would say “push” instead of “print” while in an office. Another difference, and this one is more noticeable, is between the words schwül and schwul (humid and gay). Unfortunately for me, the word I would use to describe a summer’s day is the more difficult for me to pronounce and I have been corrected on a few occasions for saying, “It’s quite gay today,” when what I was trying to say was, “It’s quite humid today.”


Am I going to make more mistakes as I continue to learn this language? Of course. Will some of them be awkward? You bet. Isn’t that part of the process? Yeah, I think so! Whatever quirk your accent has, embrace it. I have an accent and that’s ok! Don’t let it dissuade you from speaking or learning a new language!

Word of the week: duzen

Duzen- mit Du anreden (to address someone with Du [informal] you) „Du“ signalisiert soziale Nähe, Sympathie, Intimität. „Sie“ steht für soziale Distanz, Neutralität und Respekt (Du indicates closeness, sympathy and intimacy. Sie stands for social distance, neutrality and respect)

I had to think of this verb over the weekend when I saw someone whom I’d met a while ago and had seen on several occasions before. I didn’t know whether to address him formally (as he is older than I am) or informally (we’ve met several times before). The first time I heard this verb in context was one day at work earlier this year, and I had no idea what it meant until it was explained to me. To give you a little context, this happened in the copy room of a school where I teach. I was having difficulties doing something on the machine and a professor offered to help me. I had crossed paths with this gentleman a few times before (in the copy room and hallways), and we had previously introduced ourselves so he knew who I was. He wanted to show me something and started by saying “Du musst…” (you must…) and then asked “Wir können duzen, oder?" 

Now let me walk you through a common situation in my day to day life, wherein someone has just asked me a question but I do not know what the verb in the question means, so naturally I end up with a deer in the headlights look. When you are new in a language it’s natural to first translate things into your L1 (native language) in your head, which is what I did, and ended up with the English question “We can (unknown verb), right?” I replied, “Bitte?” which is the equivalent of, “I’m sorry, I didn’t understand.” He then went on to explain the meaning of the verb, namely to address each other informally, as opposed to formally (siezen). 

I’ve encountered the formal versus informal question before when studying Spanish. I had always learned that there is an Usted form, used to address someone formally. In Italian this kind of distinction, from what I remember, was more relevant in written form (addressing someone formally) than in spoken form, where it was mostly familiar (informal). However, I should admit I don’t have much experience with using either language in social or work situations in a country where it’s spoken natively (like I do with German). Most of the time when I would address someone it was on familiar terms (tu in both Spanish and Italian) as when I did speak in these languages it was usually somewhere that wasn’t a Spanish speaking or Italian speaking country, thus the concept of formality was somehow pushed aside. This distinction based on interpersonal relationships is something speakers of English find dodgy at times, as we don’t have such a difference when addressing other people, it’s always just “you.” I found a flow chart that through a series of questions can diagnose a social situation to determine whether Du or Sie should be used and found it to be quite a good summary. 

I like the part where it asks “Have you gotten drunk with this person?” where if the answer is “yes,” then the Du form is acceptable. I guess it stands to reason that drinking with someone to the point of intoxication would engender mutual informality, perhaps some degree of informality we’d rather (and with some cases do in point of fact) forget. But what about the majority of times you want to address someone without a liter of beer or cocktail in your hand? As a non-native speaker I can recall plenty of times I walked away from a conversation with someone where I thought, “Why did I use the Du form with that person?” As we’ve seen so far the answer to that question is dependent on a number of factors considering, but not limited to: the social proximity to that person (is this a co-worker, a clerk in a shop, a stranger?), whether or not it’s the first encounter, where this encounter is taking place, what are you doing at the time, all of these preferably considered before the conversation, not after. 

What even further complicates the matter is that using the Sie form with someone you could have used the Du form with can be equally embarrassing given the connotations, namely those associated with the Sie form, which the other person may feel in the given context did not apply to them. I face this situation often when I address people the same age (or thereabouts) and I just let the context influence the level of formality. If you know the person, obviously informal is acceptable. If it’s a friend of a friend, informal is also fine. If it’s a shop or any kind of service encounter, I go with Sie. If it’s the first time meeting someone and I’m not sure, I start with Sie the first few verbs, then just switch to Du, as if the previous two or three minutes of interaction imply a new level of familiarity (beyond our common age range). But with people older than me I default to Sie.

So then is it simply an issue of age? Should I just use the Sie form with people who are older than me, and the Du form for people younger than me or of the same age group? Well, yes and no. I can think of times when people younger than me have addressed me with the Sie form. However, I can also think of plenty of people older than me that I use the Du form with as well as people older than me who have addressed me in the Sie form. On the same token of Du indicating a shared feeling of closeness, I think someone older than you addressing you with the Sie form can also be considered tantamount to a mutual respect, which is to say, someone else (probably someone you yourself would have addressed as Sie) also considers you in a formal capacity. 

There are hierarchies in social interaction that are apparent regardless if people discuss them or not. In any given situation these thoughts and questions are in the background where you try to figure out exactly how you fit in the mix in relation to others, all of this is subtly dictating the choices you make on how to address the person you are speaking to. Is there a degree of authority to consider? For example when in the immigration office it’s clear that I address the person opposite me with the Sie form, not the informal Du form as obviously the person on the other end of the table is an authority figure, namely, a state authority figure (beurocrat or Beamter). When you address someone with Du, does that also imply that you are friends with that person? Is it like we are both members of the Du Club, where we both consider each other equals? In short, yeah, kind of. There’s something about a “Du” conversation that feels more relaxed than a “Sie” conversation, and I dare say, more familiar. Sometimes the topics can even change when you are “auf Du” with someone, which is to say, you may talk about different topics with someone you consider on an informal level than you would with someone on a formal level, and the differences between those topics (perhaps ones that are more personal) may lead to this perceived difference in closeness which pervades the discussion of Du versus Sie.

To the best of my understanding, the question of formal or informal is one of context and tacit permission. There are some cases, as I have found in the work place and other social settings, (“Die Du Grenze,” the Du borders) where you are not sure and by mistake could cross the line of perceived appropriateness and address someone as Du where you should have used Sie, which can be a bit embarrassing, particularly for the person who used the wrong form. Then there are cases, such as my copy room story, where someone offers the use of the familiar form directly and you know it is acceptable. My personal rule for “duzen,” is to keep in mind the context of the conversation, consider the relation to the other person and more often than not, you’ll know which way to go.

Loan words

Over the years I've studied a number of languages. It started in high school with Spanish, then in college I studied Italian. I must admit once you've studied a foreign language (not necessarily mastered it), adding a new one into the mix can become problematic. Once I started studying Italian I would sometimes use a Spanish word instead of an Italian one (aeropuerto instead of aeroporto, for example). When I studied abroad I had the luxury of asking Italian friends to check (or control as they say) my homework. For a while I would get my essays and letters back filled with circled words all of which I was told were Spanish, not Italian. Or there was the awkward moment when I was in Spain (also after I had started studying Italian) when I realized I'd forgotten how to count past 10 in Spanish as when I was asked by a Spaniard on which day I was leaving could only give the number 12 in Italian, not Spanish. These kinds of lexical similarities are explained in that both Spanish and Italian are romance languages (including French, Portugese, Catalan among others).

When I got back from studying abroad and still had a quarter left at UCSB, I decided to try an introductory German class just for fun and to impress the friends I'd made in Germany. It was only German 1 and I will admit with 10 weeks left to go in my 4+ year academic career I wasn't exactly putting my all into learning at that point, but once I moved here I thought at least I have some knowledge of it. A month after moving here I began five day a week three hour language courses. This had two functions: first I wanted to be able to say things to people, second, I wasn't allowed to work the first four months I was here so I had to do something.

You can pick any number of reasons why learning German is difficult, the case system, the articles, how long and convoluted some words seem, the list goes on and on. But for all of its difficulties German does have some user-friendly aspects. For one thing, it is phonetically very straight forward. Which is to say, spelling and pronunciation correspond at a pretty 1 to 1 ratio. Once you know the alphabet and the sounds each letter makes (keeping in mind the dipthongs [vowel combinations] and umlauts [ä, ö, ü]) you can pretty much read any word as the sounds stay the same. Anyone who has tried learning English as a foreign language does not have this same benefit. As an example of the spelling chaos of English, I submit the word ghoti, which based on English spelling could be pronounced fish (gh as in tough, o as in women, ti as in ignition). So then, suddenly words like Hoechsgeschwindigkeitsbegrenzung (maximum speed limit) or Herzkreislaufwiederbelebung (C.P.R) may take a second to sound out in your head, but aren't as intimidating as before.

Excuse the digression, the reason I began this was to discuss the benefits of being a native English speaker learning German, namely loan words. A loan word is a word borrowed from one language and incorporated into another. English is full of them, and German is, too! I can't count the number of times I have been in class and asked my students if they knew the word for something, and it was the same in English just with German pronunciation.

I'd like to conclude with a list of just some of the English words or phrases German has acquired-whether for business, media, technology, or some are words that just aren't found in German but people (Germans) know what they mean:

action, baby, bloggen (to blog-German verbs end in -en), annual report, boss, chatten (to chat), business, camping, catering, checken (to check)/check in/check out, city, couch, design, display, download, duty-free (aside: when Germans say duty free, they aren't necessarily referring to the lack of taxes placed on goods purchased in an airport or cruise ship, but rather, any area within an aiport or cruise ship which sells goods), DVD player, email, (un)fair, fan, flirten (to flirt), gamer, gangster, gentleman, googlen (to google), happy hour, hardcore, highlight, hippie, hobby, homepage, icon, image, info, interview, investment, jetlag, joggen (to jog), K.O, last-minute, laptop, logo, lounge, make-up, management, marketing, meeting, mindset, non-stop, outsourcing, pace, party, piercing (face or body), pop-up, power, reality TV, rock, rush hour, scanner, service, sexy, shampoo, small talk, spam, tattoo, team, terminal, ticket, toaster, training, T shirt, upgrade, VIP, website, and zombie...just to name a few!