# Die Times berichtet



## Jana337

Ist es einwandfrei? Könnte/sollte man _Die Times berichten _schreiben?

Jana


----------



## Ralf

Jana337 said:
			
		

> Ist es einwandfrei? Könnte/sollte man _Die Times berichten _schreiben?
> 
> Jana


Ich denke schon, dass _Die Times berichtet_ die einzig richtige Variante ist. Immerhin ist _Times_ der Titel *einer* Zeitung, also wird in Bezug auf diese Zeitung immer der Singular verwendet, unabhängig davon, dass _Times_ im Englischen eigentlich im Plural steht. Anders verhält es sich, wenn mehrere Zeitungen aufgeführt werden: _Die Post und die Times berichten_ ...

Ralf


----------



## elroy

Ralf said:
			
		

> Ich denke schon, dass _Die Times berichtet_ die einzig richtige Variante ist. Immerhin ist _Times_ der Titel *einer* Zeitung, also wird in Bezug auf diese Zeitung immer der Singular verwendet, unabhängig davon, dass _Times_ im Englischen eigentlich im Plural steht. Anders verhält es sich, wenn mehrere Zeitungen aufgeführt werden: _Die Post und die Times berichten_ ...
> 
> Ralf



Aber im Englischen würde man auch *"The Times is  (auf keinen Fall are) a newspaper."* sagen.

Es geht darum, dass _The Times _ bzw. _Die Times _ immerhin nur *eine * Zeitung ist, wie Ralf schon erwähnt hat, unbeachtet der Forme des Titels.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> Aber im Englischen würde man auch *"The Times is  (auf keinen Fall are) a newspaper."* sagen.
> 
> Es geht darum, dass _The Times _ bzw. _Die Times _ immerhin nur *eine * Zeitung ist, wie Ralf schon erwähnt hat, un*g*eachtet der Forme des Titels.



Just to very small corrections: "unbeachtet" looks like a typo and the other one is Frallemand.


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Just to *two* very small corrections: "unbeachtet" looks like a typo and the other one is Frallemand.


Sorry, I could not resist correcting your correction.  

Normally I ignore such things. Anyone who can't tell that "to" in such as case is a typo along with "unbeachtet" won't be able to read our sentences in the first place. 

What is "Frallemand"???  

Gaer


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Aber im Englischen würde man auch *"The Times is (auf keinen Fall are) a newspaper."* sagen.
> 
> Es geht darum, dass _The Times _bzw. _Die Times _immerhin nur *eine *Zeitung ist, wie Ralf schon erwähnt hat, unbeachtet der Forme des Titels.


I'm assuming that you are making this clear to people who are learning here, since the idea you just stated was already crystal clear to me from what Ralf wrote in German. Ralf's explanations are usually very fine. 

According to what I just read, any newspaper is singular in German AS IN English, regardless of what words are in the title. Period. Plural could only be used when referring to two or more newspapers, again, as in English.

Gaer


----------



## Jana337

gaer said:
			
		

> What is "Frallemand"???
> 
> Gaer



Frallemand is the French word for Denglisch. 

Jana


----------



## Jana337

gaer said:
			
		

> According to what I just read, any newspaper is singular in German AS IN English, regardless of what words are in the title. Period. Plural could only be used when referring to two or more newspapers, again, as in English.



And unlike Czech. That is why I asked. Thanks everyone for your input.

Jana


----------



## gaer

Jana337 said:
			
		

> Frallemand is the French word for Denglisch.
> 
> Jana


OH!!!

OK. Got it now. Thanks. 

Gaer


----------



## gaer

Jana337 said:
			
		

> And unlike Czech. That is why I asked. Thanks everyone for your input.
> 
> Jana


Just remember that it's the government "is" OR "are", depending on country. I've seen it both ways in the UK, but more often plural. Only singular in the US.

There is no dependable rule I know of. When you speak of teams, then you normally use plural. The Yankees, Dodgers, etc. Most baseballs teams end in "s", but basketball teams have names such as "The Heat".

*"The* *Miami* *HEAT* *is* looking for dancers, who are dynamic, well spoken, and talented to represent our organization."

*"The* *Miami* *Heat* *are* a National Basketball Association team based in Miami, Florida, USA."

The form with plural is about 5 times as common, but as you can see, it's not always easy for us either.  

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> I'm assuming that you are making this clear to people who are learning here, since the idea you just stated was already crystal clear to me from what Ralf wrote in German. Ralf's explanations are usually very fine.
> 
> According to what I just read, any newspaper is singular in German AS IN English, regardless of what words are in the title. Period. Plural could only be used when referring to two or more newspapers, again, as in English.
> 
> Gaer





> Immerhin ist Times der Titel einer Zeitung, also wird in Bezug auf diese Zeitung immer der Singular verwendet, unabhängig davon, dass Times im Englischen eigentlich im Plural steht.



That last part makes it sound that it might be used with the plural in English.  I just wanted to make it clear that the rule also applied to English.

I was not trying to "ergänzen" Ralf's "Beitrag" - das braucht er doch nicht!


----------



## Whodunit

Jana337 said:
			
		

> Frallemand is the French word for De*uzös*isch.
> 
> Jana



   

Frallemand = français (French) + allemand (German)

... a word like franglais etc.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> I was not trying to "ergänzen" Ralf's "Betrag" - das braucht er doch nicht!



Betrag? Was it a typo (again)? Didn't you mean "Be*i*trag" here?


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Betrag? Was it a typo (again)? Didn't you mean "Be*i*trag" here?



Yes.  I just edited it.


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> That last part makes it sound that it might be used with the plural in English. I just wanted to make it clear that the rule also applied to English.
> 
> I was not trying to "ergänzen" Ralf's "Beitrag" - das braucht er doch nicht!


Clear, Elroy. I know you would never do that. And it is true that he did not put "the Times" in quotes, which I'm sure he would have done had he had more time. 

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Clear, Elroy. I know you would never do that. And it is true that he did not put "the Times" in quotes, which I'm sure he would have done had he had more time.
> 
> Gaer



Is that the way it's done in German?  I know in English titles of newspapers are italicized...


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> Is that the way it's done in German?  I know in English titles of newspapers are italicized...



Yes and no. You'll often see italicized titles as a quote, e.g.:

Gestern habe ich in der _Times_/in der _Zeit_ Folgendes gelesen: ...

BUT, it's always better and fine to use quotation marks (for quotes ) like the following one:

Gestern habe ich der "Times"/in der "Zeit" Folgendes gelesen: ...

You should buy a newspaper in Freiburg and skim the articles. Search for interviews ... skim that article ... and look for sentences like:

Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die Badische Zeitung den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.

or would it be:

Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die "Badische Zeitung" den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.

or rather:

Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die _Badische Zeitung_ den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.

or even:

Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die "_Badische Zeitung_" den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.

I just remember my regional newspaper which calls itself "Lausitzer RUNDSCHAU" so that everything it capitalized. Let me apply it to my example sentence:

Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die RUNDSCHAU den Ortsvorsitzenden der Stadt Bad Liebenwerda Herrn Thomas Richter.
(I've never seen it written in another way)


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Yes and no. You'll often see italicized titles as a quote, e.g.:
> 
> Gestern habe ich in der _Times_/in der _Zeit_ Folgendes gelesen: ...
> 
> BUT, it's always better and fine to use quotation marks (for quotes ) like the following one:
> 
> Gestern habe ich der "Times"/in der "Zeit" Folgendes gelesen: ...
> 
> You should buy a newspaper in Freiburg and skim the articles. Search for interviews ... skim that article ... and look for sentences like:
> 
> Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die Badische Zeitung den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.
> 
> or would it be:
> 
> Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die "Badische Zeitung" den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.
> 
> or rather:
> 
> Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die _Badische Zeitung_ den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.
> 
> or even:
> 
> Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die "_Badische Zeitung_" den Universitätsprofessor der Stadt Freiburg Herrn Thomas Klaus.
> 
> I just remember my regional newspaper which calls itself "Lausitzer RUNDSCHAU" so that everything it capitalized. Let me apply it to my example sentence:
> 
> Zu den einzelnen Stellenangeboten befragte die RUNDSCHAU den Ortsvorsitzenden der Stadt Bad Liebenwerda Herrn Thomas Richter.
> (I've never seen it written in another way)



So I guess it's more liberal in German.  In English it has to be italicized.  You only use quotation marks for _parts _ of a larger work (chapters, sections, etc.)


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> So I guess it's more liberal in German.  In English it has to be italicized.  You only use quotation marks for _parts _ of a larger work (chapters, sections, etc.)



Ah ok, I didn't even know that yet.


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Is that the way it's done in German? I know in English titles of newspapers are italicized...


That's correct. I often use "parentheses" and CAPITALS the formatting is not lost when I switch programs and from rich to plain text.

But there are complicated rules about when to use quotes and when to use italics. 

My point was that it should have been _The times_, not just _Times_…

The plural without the article made it appear as if Ralf wanted to make a comment about the fact that it was a plural noun rather than it was the title of a newspaper. That was my impression, at any rate…
Gaer


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Ah ok, I didn't even know that yet.


I never remember that either. But these details become very important if you are writing papers for school. 

G


----------



## Whodunit

gaer said:
			
		

> I never remember that either. But these details become very important if you are writing papers for school.
> 
> G



Haha, I'll bear that in mind, for sure. However I have never written an article in English about newspapers.


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Haha, I'll bear that in mind, for sure. However I have never written an article in English about newspapers.


It's not for an article ABOUT newspapers. It's for anything you write that uses newspapers as a source. 

I never wrote papers about anything. I'm a musician!  

Gaer


----------



## Whodunit

gaer said:
			
		

> It's not for an article ABOUT newspapers. It's for anything you write that uses newspapers as a source.



Well, I suppose that's what I meant. Let me give an example. If I wrote ...:

"Last week one could have read an interesting article about the nowaday's economy in _The New York Times_. It might be sometimes interesting to read their news, because they are well-known all over the world, and most people appreciate _The New York Times_' aricles.."

... would I have been writing ABOUT or an article that used a newspaper as a source?

PS: Please correct my bad article.


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Well, I suppose that's what I meant. Let me give an example. If I wrote ...:
> 
> "Last week *there was * an interesting article about the *current * economy in _The New York Times_. *Sometimes * it *can * be  interesting to read *that paper*, because* it is * well-known all over the world, and most people appreciate *its * ar*t*icles.."
> 
> ... would I have been writing ABOUT *a newspaper * or *using * a newspaper as a source?
> 
> PS: Please correct my bad article.



In this case, you are indeed writing about a newspaper.  Either way, you need to italicize the name.  I think what Gaer was getting at is that you will need to know the rule even if you don't write ABOUT a newspaper, because anybody can wind up needing to refer to a newspaper as a source.

PS - Whether to capitalize and italicize "the" is debatable.  I would have probably written "in the _New York Times_..."


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> PS - Whether to capitalize and italicize "the" is debatable.  I would have probably written "in the _New York Times_..."



Well, I'm sure you're wrong here. You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title:

http://www.nytimes.com/

It reads "The New York Times". You would be defintely right, if the title were "New York Times". Do you agree?


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Well, I'm sure you're wrong here. You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/
> 
> It reads "The New York Times". You would be defintely right, if the title were "New York Times". Do you agree?



Are you *sure * you're sure I'm wrong?!   

Look at this:



> Titles are often in italics. You might read about how the novel _The Outsiders_ was written when the author, S.E. Hinton, was only 16 years old. Or maybe you read *the New York Times * every day after school. Titles of novels should always be in italics. That goes for titles of newspapers *(but not usually the leading "the")*, movies, music albums, television shows and anything in book form.



Source


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Well, I'm sure you're wrong here. You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/
> 
> It reads "The New York Times". You would be defintely right, if the title were "New York Times". Do you agree?


I think you are both right. It is much like German. If you don't include the article, then you don't capitalize it OR italicize it.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2082741/

Look at the top.

But if you include the article, then you must capitalize it and italicize it. It's done both ways. Remember the discussion about the same sort of thing, in German? In German you have to include case if the article is NOT in quotes.

Something is in der "Zeit" but in "Die Zeit"? I think I remember you and Ralf talking about this some time ago.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_03/b3916001_mz001.htm

There you will see it the other way.

So you can talk about the _New York Times_ or about _The New York Times_.

Does that help?

Gaer


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Are you *sure *you're sure I'm wrong?!
> 
> Look at this:
> 
> 
> 
> Source


Same thing. Check the links I gave Who. Usage does not always follow this rule. I picked what I think are reputable online sources. The important thing is to capitalize "the" if you italicize it.

However, I DO believe that your suggestion, NOT capitalizing or italicizing the article, is always 100% correct—just not the only correct way. You could never go wrong following your rule.  

Gaer


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> Are you *sure * you're sure I'm wrong?!



Okay sorry, Elroy. I'm sorry that I hurt you there.



> Look at this:
> Source



Well, okay. So you're right. My logic does fit in German.


----------



## Whodunit

gaer said:
			
		

> However, I DO believe that your suggestion, NOT capitalizing or italicizing the article, is always 100% correct—just not the only correct way. You could never go wrong following your rule.
> 
> Gaer



This is how I learned it for German: "You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title." Maybe that rule does only apply to German examples. It is, for instance, "Die Zeit", so that you always have to use the article in quotation marks. BUT you may also decline it: Ich habe es in "der Zeit" gesehen." That sentence is correct, as I learned it.


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Same thing. Check the links I gave Who. Usage does not always follow this rule. I picked what I think are reputable online sources. The important thing is to capitalize "the" if you italicize it.
> 
> However, I DO believe that your suggestion, NOT capitalizing or italicizing the article, is always 100% correct—just not the only correct way. You could never go wrong following your rule.
> 
> Gaer



I never claimed my way was the only correct way.  If you read my post carefully, you will see that I used the word *DEBATABLE*.

You are definitely right that you either both capitalize and italicize or do neither.  However, which one you choose may depend on style.


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Okay sorry, Elroy. I'm sorry that I hurt you there.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, okay. So you're right. My logic does fit in German.



You didn't hurt me, Who.  I was just challenging your somewhat audacious-sounding assertion.   

What you said is very logical, but unfortunately usage veers from logic in this case.  While "the" is indeed part of the title, it is not always the case that it is italicized and capitalized.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> You didn't hurt me, Who.  I was just challenging your somewhat audacious-sounding assertion.



Haha, good to know I didn't. 



> What you said is very logical, but unfortunately usage veers from logic in this case.  While "the" is indeed part of the title, it is not always the case that it is italicized and capitalized.



Well, that's the first rule (I thought out) for the time being here in this forum. My teacher only told me that rule similiar in German.


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> I never claimed my way was the only correct way. If you read my post carefully, you will see that I used the word *DEBATABLE*.
> 
> You are definitely right that you either both capitalize and italicize or do neither. However, which one you choose may depend on style.


Ouch! 

I was actually commenting on the site you linked, which used the word "usually". I thought that was too strong. 

You might notice that I said, I believe, that if Who followed your general rule, NOT including the article, it would always be fine. OK?  

I think we agree, right?  

Gaer


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> This is how I learned it for German: "You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title." Maybe that rule does only apply to German examples. It is, for instance, "Die Zeit", so that you always have to use the article in quotation marks. BUT you may also decline it: Ich habe es in "der Zeit" gesehen." That sentence is correct, as I learned it.


OK. I knew there was a choice. I didn't realize that the choice was also included in the quotes. 

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Ouch!
> 
> I was actually commenting on the site you linked, which used the word "usually". I thought that was too strong.
> 
> You might notice that I said, I believe, that if Who followed your general rule, NOT including the article, it would always be fine. OK?
> 
> I think we agree, right?
> 
> Gaer



 Yes, we definitely do.   

It was just a small misunderstanding - sorry for coming on too strong; I just wanted to clarify my intentions.

I actually also twitched when I read "usually"; but it served the purpose of showing Who that the other possibility existed!


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> This is how I learned it for German: "You should italicize the article as well, if it belongs to the title." Maybe that rule does only apply to German examples. It is, for instance, "Die Zeit", so that you always have to use the article in quotation marks. BUT you may also decline it: Ich habe es in "der Zeit" gesehen." That sentence is correct, as I learned it.



But in German you don't italicize them, do you???


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> But in German you don't italicize them, do you???



Not, but we use quotation marks. There's more freedom in German.    You could also italicize them.


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Yes, we definitely do.
> 
> It was just a small misunderstanding - sorry for coming on too strong; I just wanted to clarify my intentions.
> 
> I actually also twitched when I read "usually"; but it served the purpose of showing Who that the other possibility existed!


I understand, and I will repeat that in my experience NOT italicizing or capitalizing the article is more common—although I would not guess how much.

I also wanted to make another point, something that draws attention to something I hate to talk about—my age.

You have to remember that when I began writing, there were no italics. You guys are used to word-processing. In my time you had to underline or put things in quotes, then if what you wrote got printed, THEN it could be done correctly.

But my reason for avoiding bold, italics and underlines has to do with the problem It old you about. The coding in Word, for instance, is so incredibly awkward if you try to paste things in another program, it can be darn near imopssible to reformat the text without stripping it down to basics. When I run into problems, I often paste into Notepad, which very kindly strips all the unnecessary code. Unfortunately it also strips colors and the other things I talked about. That's the reason I so often stick to caps and quotes. They don't go away. 

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> I understand, and I will repeat that in my experience NOT italicizing or capitalizing the article is more common—although I would not guess how much.



Yup.  "I read the _New York Times_" looks a lot better to me than "I read _The New York Times_."


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Yup. "I read the _New York Times_" looks a lot better to me than "I read _The New York Times_."


I see nothing better about one than the other, but I did not even notice that newpaper names are not in quotes. 

Remember, I was reading books written following the new rules and did not even notice the difference. That's not exaggeration. It's pretty amazing not to notice that muß switched to muss.  

Gaer


----------

