“Nach meinem Research war ich speziell auf Mais und Weizen bullish (…)” (Hufeisen, Mark, 2007: ABN AMRO marketindex magazin, Nr. 07, S.33.)
By chance I found this sentence in the above indicated magazine while riding the train back home from the University of Bayreuth today. I don’t know why, but I directly had to take a strong and good laugh. Maybe for the Anglicisms or maybe because some kind of overbearing arrogant sense struck me. Maybe, because in a certain way, this remark seems so silly to me.
I guess, as for the Anglicisms in the German language, a translation wouldn’t help much here to give a none German-speaker insight of my thought. So I leave it at that, but not before letting you know that “Handeln” is totally out of fashion for a successful businessman nowadays:
“Insgesamt sind die Märkte dieses Jahr bisher wirklich aufregend, mit reichlich Volatilität, doch nicht einfach zu traden (…)” (emphasis mine).
Quote III
About this entry
Posted on Wednesday, July 11th, 2007 at 23:49, filed under Generalosity. Subscribe to this feed, leave a response, or trackback from your own site. You are also welcome to Print This Post .
anthronaut Says:
Jul 18th, 2007 at 13:59Visit anthronaut
I don’t see what’s so silly about anglicisms in German language. Foreign language elements have always been in fashion, for the last three centuries at least.
warauduati Says:
Jul 18th, 2007 at 22:06Visit warauduati
You might be right. Maybe it’s because I am turning to be an advocate of the pure German language. Or let’s say, I simply don’t see the point in using foreign terms while it would be so easy to say it in your mother tongue. Besides, the silly part is just the way it sounds. In Anthropology as well we try to find good translations for certain idioms so that everything is “understandable” . Furthermore, I am not an advocate of a sophisticated academic (or what not) language neither, but one of simplicity.
As far as the fashion goes. Of course, you are absolutely right. I am not a linguist, so I wouldn’t certify on the “last three centuries” right here besides accepting your argument (A wonderful research: “language and fashion over the years” ). But I cannot help myself in thinking of some nitpicking image someone wants to produce. At least in this case!
Nevertheless, the use of this type of language, in this case a business tongue with Anglicisms, is intentionally used. So to speak, with certain aims, to address a certain clientele, to produce a certain image of the matter as well as of the person using this type of language. Maybe credibility? Maybe fashion? And this is the interesting part of producing identity by means of language.
anthronaut Says:
Jul 18th, 2007 at 22:19Visit anthronaut
And this is the interesting part of producing identity by means of language. Yes, absolutely :-)