Revision as of 03:31, 10 November 2022 edit2405:204:800f:37e0:f169:c2da:9e63:ac7b (talk) →Morning: new sectionTags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:50, 10 November 2022 edit undoPfold (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,581 edits Undid revision 1121027746 by 2405:204:800F:37E0:F169:C2DA:9E63:AC7B (talk)Tag: UndoNext edit → | ||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
::Yes, thank you. The current text is ambiguous. I feel it needs the attention of a German speaker to tease out the nuances. (Yes, I should have tried asking at the article talk page first. Feel free to transfer the conversation there.) --] (]) 14:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC) | ::Yes, thank you. The current text is ambiguous. I feel it needs the attention of a German speaker to tease out the nuances. (Yes, I should have tried asking at the article talk page first. Feel free to transfer the conversation there.) --] (]) 14:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
:::I will remove the passage completely. That page isn't even about the diacritic nor German (or Germanic) umlaut, but the linguistic phenomenon in general. So it's quite off-topic. –] (]) 15:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC) | :::I will remove the passage completely. That page isn't even about the diacritic nor German (or Germanic) umlaut, but the linguistic phenomenon in general. So it's quite off-topic. –] (]) 15:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
== Morning == | |||
None ] (]) 03:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:50, 10 November 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the German language article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
German language was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. Review: October 13, 2006. |
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines. |
Umlaut (linguistics)
Would someone have a quick look at Umlaut (linguistics)#Marking please? As written, it appears to suggest that the mark is historic. I don't speak German but even I know this to be nonsense. Thank you. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Your concern isn't entirely clear to me (nor why you're asking here instead of at Talk:Umlaut (linguistics), but that's secondary). Is it that you're interpreting "originally" to mean that the mark was originally used but no longer is? I can see it being read that way, but I can also read it another way, to indicate that that was the umlaut mark's original purpose, but that it is now used in words that involve no phonological umlaut, as in foreign borrowings such as Büro and imaginär, or perhaps even in native words like Bär (Middle High German ber). Perhaps that was what was intended. If so, then it should be reworded to remove the ambiguity. Largoplazo (talk) 13:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. The current text is ambiguous. I feel it needs the attention of a German speaker to tease out the nuances. (Yes, I should have tried asking at the article talk page first. Feel free to transfer the conversation there.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- I will remove the passage completely. That page isn't even about the diacritic nor German (or Germanic) umlaut, but the linguistic phenomenon in general. So it's quite off-topic. –Austronesier (talk) 15:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. The current text is ambiguous. I feel it needs the attention of a German speaker to tease out the nuances. (Yes, I should have tried asking at the article talk page first. Feel free to transfer the conversation there.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class language articles
- Top-importance language articles
- WikiProject Languages articles
- C-Class Germany articles
- Top-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- C-Class France articles
- Low-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- C-Class Switzerland articles
- Top-importance Switzerland articles
- All WikiProject Switzerland pages
- Delisted good articles