# Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern



## jinxnao

Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern, wenn auch
diese Netze vermascht betrieben werden.
What does this sentence mean literally? Risiko is off when also this net meshed or risiko is still  on even if this net is meshed?

I guess the second one is more reasonable isnt it?


----------



## Schlabberlatz

Maybe "This risk can be brought under control if …" Don’t know about the rest. What’s the context?


----------



## manfy

'wenn auch' usually expresses 'even though'
'auch wenn' usually expresses 'even when/if'

Thus, in simple terms, "The risk can be tackled even though these networks run in meshed topology". That would make most grammatical and technical sense.

Alternatively, the writer may have intended a different emphasis (but in this case I'd give him a C- for ambiguous writing style) :
Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern, wenn *auch diese* Netze vermascht betrieben werden.
"The risk can be tackled if these networks run in meshed topology also". This is grammatically possible but technically unlikely.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

jinxnao said:


> Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern


Remarkable usage this is. The effective meaning _(This risk can be guarded *against*)_ is the exact opposite of what it means on the face of it _(This risk can be guarded). _

In other words, _Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern (= Dieses Risiko kann abgesichert werden)_ is used to mean the exact opposite, i.e. _Etwas/__Man kann *gegen* dieses Risiko abgesichert werden._


----------



## perny

Schimmelreiter said:


> Remarkable usage this is. The effective meaning _(This risk can be guarded *against*)_ is the exact opposite of what it means on the face of it _(This risk can be guarded). _
> 
> In other words, _Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern (= Dieses Risiko kann abgesichert werden)_ is used to mean the exact opposite, i.e. _Etwas/__Man kann *gegen* dieses Risiko abgesichert werden._



Hah, well noticed!

It is almost as if it has been blindly used, maybe machine translated, from the financial context of "to hedge" (which does indeed invert the other transitive meanings).


----------



## Schimmelreiter

I believe it's been used intentionally. By _remarkable_, I didn't mean _unusual. _It's linguistically remarkable, but it's indeed quite common. It's, for instance, used by insurance companies: _Folgende Risken sind abgesichert. _I consider it correct. There may even be a good-sounding Greek-origin word - which I happen to be unaware of - for using a word to mean its opposite.


----------



## bearded

> Schimmelreiter:
> a good-sounding Greek-origin word


I would say  (in German) _Antinomie _or _Paralogismus._


----------



## jinxnao

From a german fachbuch 

Sicherheit:
Beim Auftreten einer Störung bleibt die Versorgung gewährleistet,
ohne dass ein Betriebsmittel überlastet wird. Dies ist zum Beispiel
in den Hochspannungsnetzen der Fall. Viele Hochspannungsfreileitungen
sind parallel ausgeführt. Beide Systeme werden nur mit der
halben Nennleistung betrieben. Beim Ausfall eines Systems übernimmt
das zweite System 100 % der Leistung, ohne überlastet zu
werden. Man spricht vom (n-1)-Prinzip. Gelegentlich begegnet man
sogar einem (n-2)- bzw. (n-3)-Prinzip. Das (n-1)-Prinzip muss für die
maximale Netzlast, das heißt die Jahreshöchstlast erfüllt sein. Bei geringerer
Netzbelastung ist die Sicherheit entsprechend höher, da das
Netz bei einem Fehler nicht zwingend in einen verletzlichen Zustand
übergeht, sondern gegebenenfalls noch weitere Fehler tolerieren kann.
Wird bei einer Störung das (n-1)-Kriterium verletzt, muss der (n-1)-
Betriebszustand in kürzester Zeit durch geeignete Schalthandlungen
etc. wieder hergestellt werden (s. a. 17.1.1.4). Das (n-1)-Prinzip versagt
in strahlenförmig betriebenen Netzen, wenn beispielsweise in
einem 110-kV Netz die Masten einer ganzen Trasse durch exzessive
Eisbelastung umknicken und beide parallelen Drehstromsysteme
gleichzeitig ausfallen. *Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern, wenn auch*
*diese Netze vermascht betrieben werden.*


----------



## jinxnao

I guess it means this risk makes itself going on. Because even when you applied a ring configuration in an installation , a falling down of a post  means that the supply of electrical energy will fail.


----------



## Frieder

I think it means that this risk can be *avoided, by ensuring* that radial grits are intermeshed as well.


----------



## manfy

jinxnao said:


> Das (n-1)-Prinzip versagt
> in strahlenförmig betriebenen Netzen, wenn beispielsweise in
> einem 110-kV Netz die Masten einer ganzen Trasse durch exzessive
> Eisbelastung umknicken und beide parallelen Drehstromsysteme
> gleichzeitig ausfallen. *Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern, wenn auch*
> *diese Netze vermascht betrieben werden.*



Thanks! That clears things up!
A power grid with star topology is inherently not redundant. To make it 'somewhat redundant', the supplier will run 2 separate supply systems on the same mast (for cost reasons). However, if any one of the masts fails mechanically then both supply circuitries will fail. This (relatively minimal) risk of failure can be avoided if those grids are also run in meshed topology. 

The phrasing of this sentence is badly chosen! It should read like this to make it clearer and minimize ambiguity:
"*Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern (abwenden), wenn diese Netze auch vermascht betrieben werden [, anstatt rein strahlenförmig].*"

@ Frieder: What is a radial grid???


----------



## Schlabberlatz

I think it would be less ambiguous if you replaced "auch" by "ebenfalls" ("… wenn diese Netze ebenfalls vermascht betrieben werden.")


----------



## jinxnao

I cant understand why here the subject is the risk and not the electrical system?
Because I could not see such a use as "lassen sich absichern" in dictionaries.


----------



## Frieder

Dieses Auto lässt sich gut fahren = Dieses Auto kann man gut fahren.
Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern = Dieses Risiko kann man absichern.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

jinxnao said:


> I cant understand why here the subject is the risk and not the electrical system?
> Because I could not see such a use as "lassen sich absichern" in dictionaries.


It's passive in meaning:





Schimmelreiter said:


> _Dieses Risiko lässt sich absichern (= Dieses Risiko kann abgesichert werden)_


----------



## perny

Schimmelreiter said:


> I believe it's been used intentionally. By _remarkable_, I didn't mean _unusual. _It's linguistically remarkable, but it's indeed quite common. It's, for instance, used by insurance companies: _Folgende Risken sind abgesichert. _I consider it correct. There may even be a good-sounding Greek-origin word - which I happen to be unaware of - for using a word to mean its opposite.



Looks like in English its called a contronym.

Like the word "quite" can mean little or a lot.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

But _absichern _only has one meaning _(to guard) _except when used with the one noun _Risiko_, in which case it means _to guard against. _(It would be pretty weird for risks to be _guarded_. They are _guarded against._)

I can't think of any noun other than _Risiko _that causes _absichern _to take on the opposite of its meaning.

So it's some extreme sort of contronym. (I hate mixed Latin/Greek compounds. I never say _automobile. _)


----------



## Perseas

Frieder said:


> I think it means that this risk can be *avoided, by ensuring* that radial grits are intermeshed as well.





Schimmelreiter said:


> It's linguistically remarkable, but it's indeed quite common. It's, for instance, used by insurance companies: _Folgende Risken sind abgesichert. _I consider it correct.


Since it's correct, I would say it is an elliptic construction. Perhaps an abstraction?


----------



## manfy

Perseas said:


> Since it's correct, I would say it is an elliptic construction. Perhaps an abstraction?



No, I think the problem comes from the fact that 'absichern' has several meanings:
-) to make safe; to protect; to secure [against intruders] -> "Die Unfallstelle wurde abgesichert."
-) to cover by insurance -> "Auch Diebstahlrisiko ist mit einer Vollkaskoversicherung abgesichert." Of course, if you take this literally, this sentence is nonsense on several levels because insurance coverage has no influence on the risk of car theft. Insurance only protects against the financial loss caused by car theft! However, from a pragmatic view it's clear that the latter was meant with "das Risiko wurde abgesichert".

A better phrasing for the OP might be: "Man kann sich gegen dieses Risiko absichern, indem ..." (With 'better' I mean, less prone to linguistic scrutiny!  )
or "Dieses Risiko lässt sich abwenden/umgehen/minimieren, wenn ..." (here 'this risk' refers to the risk of complete power failure and not the risk of mechanical failure due to power line icing.)


----------



## Perseas

manfy said:


> No, I think the problem comes from the fact that 'absichern' has several meanings:
> ....
> -) to cover by insurance -> "Auch Diebstahlrisiko ist mit einer Vollkaskoversicherung abgesichert." [...] However, from a pragmatic view it's clear that the latter was meant with "das Risiko wurde abgesichert".


manfy, you probably refer to this:

But _absichern _only has one meaning _(to guard) _except when used with the one noun _Risiko_, in which case it means _to guard against._(Schimmelreiter)


----------



## manfy

Perseas said:


> manfy, you probably refer to this:
> 
> But _absichern _only has one meaning _(to guard) _except when used with the one noun _Risiko_, in which case it means _to guard against._(Schimmelreiter)



Well, for a general dictionary definition I can agree with that. But in actual word usage, the meaning of such words can be extended by context.
For instance, the proper translation for 'to cover by insurance' is actually 'versichern'. The sentence "Auch Diebstahlrisiko ist mit einer Vollkaskoversicherung *ver*sichert." is semantically perfectly accurate and yet, it has a very different ring to it than abgesichert. 
I'd say the latter is insurance salesman marketing lingo. 'Versichert' instills the thought of insurance premium payments. 'Abgesichert' on the other hand instills the thought of being safeguarded against something .... but if you think about it logically, you will realize that a life insurance will not really save/guard you from death!


----------



## Schimmelreiter

manfy said:


> if you think about it logically, you will realize that a life insurance will not really save/guard you from death!


Property, life, health and even parts of your body can be _ver__sichert_, so the *beneficiary* gets money if the insured event occurs, whilst risks are _ab__gesichert. _


PS
There's the type of life insurance where you yourself are the beneficiary if you live to the covenanted age, and there's the type where your death is the insured event, with somebody else being the beneficiary, obviously. If your wife is, have your dog have a bite of whatever she serves you for dinner.


----------



## Schlabberlatz

perny said:


> Looks like in English its called a contronym.


Very interesting, thanks for pointing this out. I’ve read the Wikipedia article about it. @Schimmelreiter: following this article, you can also call it "antagonym", and if that word is not impressive enough, there’s also "enantiodrome". The common German term seems to be "Januswort".

I have also encountered lots of "auto-antonyms" in French, for example "profond", which can mean "low", but also "high": "au plus profond du ciel" – at least that’s my interpretation of it. It seems to be somewhat comparable to the Latin "altus" that is mentioned in the Wikipedia article. To make it even more complicated, it can also mean "far away" (again, my interpretation).


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Schlabberlatz said:


> enantiodrome


You made my day. I'll mention it over dinner.


----------

