Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:38 am)

Reviso wrote:
Pia Kahn wrote:
Reviso wrote:...

Couldn't "straßenbauend" be a predicative adjective ? Literal translation: ""The Jews able to work are guided [or : will be guided] into these areas
while being building roads" ?
R.


"The predicate provides information about the subject, such as what the subject is, what the subject is doing, or what the subject is like. The relation between a subject and its predicate is sometimes called a nexus. A predicative nominal is a noun phrase, such as in George III is the king of England, the king of England being the predicative nominal. The subject and predicative nominal must be connected by a linking verb, also called a copula. A predicative adjective is an adjective, such as in Ivano is attractive, attractive being the predicative adjective. The subject and predicative adjective must also be connected by a copula."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_(grammar)
.


Perhaps we should agree on the grammatical definitions.
In the following phrase : "We saw him drunk", what is the grammatical function of "drunk" ? In French, we say "attribut du complément", and the French-English dictionaries translate "attribut" by "predicative adjective" so I thought that "drunk" was a predicative adjective for the complement "him". Perhaps I was wrong, but then, replace "predicative adjective" by the correct expression in my preceding message.
Same question for "Wir sahen ihn betrunken" : what is the grammatical function of "betrunken" ?
Same question for "Wir führen die Juden straßenbauend" : what is the grammatical function of "straßenbauend" ?
Thanks.
R.
P.S. My two last posts are results of a technical mistake. They are copies of the preceding post. Sorry.


We saw him drunk

We is the subject of the phrase. The predicate of the phrase somehow defines the subject, it predicates the subject. The term "drunk" forms part of the predicate. Predicates usually have verbs. In this case the verb is "saw". Predicates, which do not have verbs are found in nominal sentences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_sentence

They may have nominal or predicative predicates.

The grammatical function of "betrunken" is to define how he was seen.

The grammatical function of "straßenbauend" is to define how the jews were lead. Just replace "straßenbauend" with "langsam". "Wir führen die Juden langsam" What is the grammatical function of "langsam"? Very simple, the term "langsam" just as the term "straßenbauend" are adverbs in these sentences. The only difference is that "langsam" (slowly) makes sense whereas "straßenbauend" is garbage.



avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:51 am)

Pia Kahn wrote:
Reviso wrote:
Pia Kahn wrote:
"The predicate provides information about the subject, such as what the subject is, what the subject is doing, or what the subject is like. The relation between a subject and its predicate is sometimes called a nexus. A predicative nominal is a noun phrase, such as in George III is the king of England, the king of England being the predicative nominal. The subject and predicative nominal must be connected by a linking verb, also called a copula. A predicative adjective is an adjective, such as in Ivano is attractive, attractive being the predicative adjective. The subject and predicative adjective must also be connected by a copula."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_(grammar)
.


Perhaps we should agree on the grammatical definitions.
In the following phrase : "We saw him drunk", what is the grammatical function of "drunk" ? In French, we say "attribut du complément", and the French-English dictionaries translate "attribut" by "predicative adjective" so I thought that "drunk" was a predicative adjective for the complement "him". Perhaps I was wrong, but then, replace "predicative adjective" by the correct expression in my preceding message.
Same question for "Wir sahen ihn betrunken" : what is the grammatical function of "betrunken" ?
Same question for "Wir führen die Juden straßenbauend" : what is the grammatical function of "straßenbauend" ?
Thanks.
R.
P.S. My two last posts are results of a technical mistake. They are copies of the preceding post. Sorry.


We saw him drunk

We is the subject of the phrase. The predicate of the phrase somehow defines the subject, it predicates the subject. The term "drunk" forms part of the predicate. Predicates usually have finite verbs. In this case the verb is "saw". Predicates, which do not have finite verbs are found in nominal sentences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_sentence

They may have predicatives nouns or predicative adjectives, i.e. nouns or adjectives, which essentially form the predicate of the sentence. For example: Julia is pretty. In this term "sick" is a predicative adjective and "is" is the copula.

The grammatical function of "betrunken" is to define how he was seen. The term "saw him drunk" is the predicate of the sentence. The term "betrunken" is not an (predicative) adjective of the subject "we" in this sentence. This is your mistake.

The grammatical function of "straßenbauend" is to define how the jews were lead. Just replace "straßenbauend" with "langsam". "Wir führen die Juden langsam" What is the grammatical function of "langsam"? Very simple, the term "langsam" just as the term "straßenbauend" are adverbs in these sentences. The only difference is that "langsam" (slowly) makes sense whereas "straßenbauend" is garbage.

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:42 am)

Pia Kahn wrote:We saw him drunk

We is the subject of the phrase. The predicate of the phrase somehow defines the subject, it predicates the subject. The term "drunk" forms part of the predicate. Predicates usually have verbs. In this case the verb is "saw". Predicates, which do not have verbs are found in nominal sentences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_sentence

They may have nominal or predicative predicates.

The grammatical function of "betrunken" is to define how he was seen.

The grammatical function of "straßenbauend" is to define how the jews were lead. Just replace "straßenbauend" with "langsam". "Wir führen die Juden langsam" What is the grammatical function of "langsam"? Very simple, the term "langsam" just as the term "straßenbauend" are adverbs in these sentences. The only difference is that "langsam" (slowly) makes sense whereas "straßenbauend" is garbage.


Thanks, but it seems that you don't answer my questions.
You say "The grammatical function of "betrunken" is to define how he was seen ". Yes, but I asked for a grammatical function as used by grammarians : predicative adjective, adjective as object complement, etc.

I try another question.
Is the phrase "Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt" good German ?
If it is, why couldn't the phrase "Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" be correct ?

You say that "straßenbauend" is garbage. Do you mean that the word "straßenbauend" is garbage per se, or that it is garbage only in some constructions ? I found this : "Anstatt die immer noch kahle Negevwueste strassenbauend und bewaessernd zu besiedeln besetzte man immer mehr von der UNO nicht zugeteilte Gebiete (...)"
https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/verstos ... olanhoehen
(2 November 2017)
Is it garbage ?

avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:54 am)

Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel gefahren" good German ?"

It is good German. "betrunken" (drunk) relates to "gefahren" (driven). How was he driven? In a drunk manner. "betrunken" does not relate to "er" (he). The sentence does not say that "er" (he) is drunk. But this is what you want to construe.

If it is, why couldn't the phrase "Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" be correct ?

If it is correct in a grammatical sense, then it doesn't make any sense, because "straßenbauend" (building roads) relates to "geführt" (guide). The "führen" (guiding) is performed in a "straßenbauend" (building roads) manner. That doesn't make any sense! That's garbage!

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:27 am)

Pia Kahn wrote:Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel gefahren" good German ?" It is good German. "betrunken" relates to "driving". How was he driven? In a drunk manner. "betrunken" does not relate to "er". The sentence does not say that "er" is drunk. But this is what you want to construe.

If it is, why couldn't the phrase "Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" be correct ?

If it is correct in a grammatical sense, then it doesn't make any sense, because "straßenbauend" relates to "geführt". The "führen" is performed in a "straßenbaund" manner. That doesn't make any sense! That's garbage!


I had first written "gefahren", but thereafter, I replaced it by "geführt" (before you answered). I'm sorry, but may I ask that you answer my questions as they are now formulated :

Is the phrase "Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt" good German ? (For me, "betrunken" relates to "er".)
If it is, why couldn't the phrase "Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" be correct ?

You say that "straßenbauend" is garbage. Do you mean that the word "straßenbauend" is garbage per se, or that it is garbage only in some constructions ? I found this : "Anstatt die immer noch kahle Negevwueste strassenbauend und bewaessernd zu besiedeln besetzte man immer mehr von der UNO nicht zugeteilte Gebiete (...)"
https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/verstos ... olanhoehen
(2 November 2017)
Is it garbage ? Thanks beforehand.
R.

avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:41 am)

"I had first written "gefahren", but thereafter, I replaced it by "geführt" (before you answered). I'm sorry, but may I ask that you answer my questions as they are now formulated : "

That doesn't make a difference, because the grammatical function of a term does not depend on its meaning.

Is the phrase "Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt" good German ? (For me, "betrunken" relates to "er".)

That is wrong. "Er wurde betrunken geführt" does not mean that "er" is betrunken. It means that the "führen" is performed in a drunken manner.

I am slowly getting pissed off because you appear to be someone who does not WANT to understand.

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:01 pm)

Pia Kahn wrote: "Er wurde betrunken geführt" does not mean that "er" is betrunken. It means that the "führen" is performed in a drunken manner.


Do you mean that the sense of the phrase "Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt" is "He was led to the guardhouse by a drunk policeman" ?
In the phrase "Der Mann hinter dem Steuer des Wagens wurde auch ins Krankenhaus und Krankenhaus transportiert, er wurde betrunken gefunden", do you think that the words "er wurde betrunken gefunden" mean that the man was found by a drunk person ?
R.

avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:04 pm)

Do you mean that the sense of the phrase "Er wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt" is "He was led to the guardhouse by a drunk policeman" ?

NO because I do not know who is leading (führen) the he (er).

If you write: "Er wurde von einem Polizisten betrunken gefahren (geführt, vergewaltigt, erstochen,.... whatever you want!)" Then the policeman must be drunk, yes.

"er wurde betrunken gefunden" mean that the man was found by a drunk person ? No, the term "betrunken" describes HOW he was found. It describes the MANNER in which eh was found.

The word "finden" does not merel mean to "find" or "discover". It can also have a different meaning and function.

(transitive, with a noun phrase and a predicate adjective) to think that (something) is (a certain way); to consider (something) to be (a certain way);

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/finden

In this case the term found is a copula for a nominal sentence and "gefunden" is a predicative adjective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_sentence

Führen does not have a similiar function.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/f%C3%BChren

I am saying the same thing over and over again. The adverb is an attribute of the verb not the subject. You do not WANT to understand this. This discussion is over unless you start asking reasonable questions.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2234
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby borjastick » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:34 pm)

I am saying the same thing over and over again. The adverb is an attribute of the verb not the subject. You do not WANT to understand this. This discussion is over unless you start asking reasonable questions.


Oh please let that be the case FFS, this thread really needs to be moved to the 'I don't want to speak German but am too anal and dull to moan about it' forum. Sticking needles in my eyes whilst watching paint dry would be more fun than this irrelevant tripe. Why not make it relevant to the meaning of the document and making a point that matters!
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:37 pm)

"Why not make it relevant to the meaning of the document and making a point that matters!"

The sentence is either non-sensical or grammatically wrong. So there are problems with the German language in this document. That's the essense of the discussion.

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:57 pm)

Let us see if there is a reader who understood Pia Kahn's explanations.
Could anybody, other than Pia Kahn, explain why this phrase is correct :
"Der Mann wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt"
and why this phrase is incorrect :
"Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" ?
R.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3100
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Hektor » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:05 pm)

Reviso wrote:....
Google finds "privaten Berufen" 693 times, many times in academic books. How is it possible if "Private Berufe is a misnommer indicative of someone that has learned German well, but is lacking the general practice in the language and familiarity with the semantics and legal terminology." ?
R.

And how many times does it get for "Freiberufler"?

I got 4 260 000. That's about 10.000 times more then "privaten Berufen", which I also had a look at and noticed that mostly it wasn't really in the distinctive meaning of "Freiberufler" in German. It was used for people working in the private sector as opposed to the public sector. Now that can include people one would call "Freiberufler" in German, but that doesn't make it the term for this particular vocational group.

So sorry, just because someone use "privaten Berufe" in an academic journal, that doesn't invalidate the argument that "privaten Berufen" has been used semantically false in the text of the Wannsee-protocol.

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:18 pm)

Hektor wrote:
Reviso wrote:....
Google finds "privaten Berufen" 693 times, many times in academic books. How is it possible if "Private Berufe is a misnommer indicative of someone that has learned German well, but is lacking the general practice in the language and familiarity with the semantics and legal terminology." ?
R.

And how many times does it get for "Freiberufler"?

I got 4 260 000. That's about 10.000 times more then "privaten Berufen", which I also had a look at and noticed that mostly it wasn't really in the distinctive meaning of "Freiberufler" in German. It was used for people working in the private sector as opposed to the public sector. Now that can include people one would call "Freiberufler" in German, but that doesn't make it the term for this particular vocational group.

So sorry, just because someone use "privaten Berufe" in an academic journal, that doesn't invalidate the argument that "privaten Berufen" has been used semantically false in the text of the Wannsee-protocol.


The protocol cites some Berufe that are Private Berufe (since the professions cited in the Protocol are from the private sector, and, as you said, "Private Berufe" was used for people working in the private sector) and it calls them "Private Berufe". Where is the problem ?

By the way, do you have an opinion about my last question :
Could anybody, other than Pia Kahn, explain why this phrase is correct :
"Der Mann wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt"
and why this phrase is incorrect :
"Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" ?
Thanks.
R.

avatar
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Pia Kahn » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:16 pm)

Reviso wrote:
Hektor wrote:
Reviso wrote:....
Google finds "privaten Berufen" 693 times, many times in academic books. How is it possible if "Private Berufe is a misnommer indicative of someone that has learned German well, but is lacking the general practice in the language and familiarity with the semantics and legal terminology." ?
R.

And how many times does it get for "Freiberufler"?

I got 4 260 000. That's about 10.000 times more then "privaten Berufen", which I also had a look at and noticed that mostly it wasn't really in the distinctive meaning of "Freiberufler" in German. It was used for people working in the private sector as opposed to the public sector. Now that can include people one would call "Freiberufler" in German, but that doesn't make it the term for this particular vocational group.

So sorry, just because someone use "privaten Berufe" in an academic journal, that doesn't invalidate the argument that "privaten Berufen" has been used semantically false in the text of the Wannsee-protocol.


The protocol cites some Berufe that are Private Berufe (since the professions cited in the Protocol are from the private sector, and, as you said, "Private Berufe" was used for people working in the private sector) and it calls them "Private Berufe". Where is the problem ?

By the way, do you have an opinion about my last question :
Could anybody, other than Pia Kahn, explain why this phrase is correct :
"Der Mann wurde betrunken zum Polizeikumpel geführt"
and why this phrase is incorrect :
"Die Juden werden straßenbauend in diese Gebiete geführt" ?
Thanks.
R.


Can you please explain to the informed readers, what "The jews are being lead street-building(ly) into these areas" means?

I do understand the phrase: "The jews are being lead slowly into these areas". I merely submit to you that "street-buildingly" doesn't make any sense.

Thanks

Pia

avatar
Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Wannsee Conference minutes debunked

Postby Reviso » 6 months 1 week ago (Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:34 pm)

Pia Kahn wrote:Can you please explain to the informed readers, what "The jews are being lead street-building(ly) into these areas" means?
I do understand the phrase: "The jews are being lead slowly into these areas". I merely submit to you that "street-buildingly" doesn't make any sense.
Thanks
Pia


Why should I explain a phrase that you forged ?
As I said, I would like that another person than you answers my question. So we will see if there is a reader who understood your explanations.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 5 guests