Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2020 April 23

= April 23 =

Prophesying in German
Welche Wonne, welche Lust Regt sich nun in meiner Brust! Voller Freuden will ich springen, Ihr die frohe Nachricht bringen; Und mit lachet und mit Scherzen Ihrem schwachen, kranken Herzen Freud und Jubel prophezeihn.

This aria, from Die Entführung aus dem Serail, ends with a surprising word. "Prophesy" isn't quite a word I'd expect to use in this situation (basically, the singer is rejoicing that she'll be able to give her friend some wonderful news), but translations I'm finding, e.g., consistently render "prophezeihn" as "prophesy". Does this word have any other common meanings, any other meanings that could make sense here? Or do we have to conclude that Bretzner definitely meant "prophesy" here? Nyttend backup (talk) 13:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * (As a sidenote, I would have expected that to be "Lachen" rather than "lachet"; the Internet seems to have both versions.) I don't know the opera, but prophesying doesn't seem surprising to me here: the singer's going to tell her friend about the "joy and celebration" that the friend's going to experience in the future, because of this new, good situation. Does that make sense in the context? HenryFlower 14:41, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to this quasi-Frenchman. Rejoice is just old joy, coming around again. And if you're already enjoying looking forward to rejoicing, your bosom is basically bursting with prejoice. But that sounds weirder than "prophesy". So lo, she sings of that. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Right; this fits with Ihr die frohe Nachricht bringen (to bring you the good news). The verb verkündigen would perhaps have been easier to understand, but does not fit in the strictly followed metre of trochaic tetrametres. Other editions have mit Lachen: . I think lachet is a typo; it does not make grammatical sense: mit requires a noun phrase, and this finite verb form needs a third-person subject that is nowhere to be found. --Lambiam 16:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * To say nothing of the internal rhyme (Lachen / schwachen). Deor (talk) 16:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Could also be interpreted as "mit lachen" (verb: laugh along). Except for the meter, the repetition of "mit" with the two objects Lachen and Scherzen is unnecessary. Jmar67 (talk) 22:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Then it'd have to be spelled as one word, "mitlachen". It still would need to be capitalised and it wouldn't make sense or be grammatically correct within its context. No, "lachet" should simply read "Lachen", as pointed out above. ---Sluzzelin talk  23:10, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I guess it could theoretically read (see punctuation)
 * Voller Freuden will ich springen,
 * Ihr die frohe Nachricht bringen;
 * Und mitlachen, und mit Scherzen
 * Ihrem schwachen, kranken Herzen
 * Freud und Jubel prophezeihn.
 * But that's not it. ---Sluzzelin talk  23:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I anticipated that argument, but "mit" can appear as a separate adverb in this type of construction. 01:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Only in some finite verb tenses (present, preterite, imperative), in which case the parts are also swapped (wir lachen mit). In Sluzzeli's theoretical reading it is an infinitive ([ich will] springen, [...] bringen; und mitlachen, und [...] prophezeihn). Also, the stress in the word mitlachen is on the syllable mit'', which goes against the metre. --Lambiam 05:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In my experience, "prophezeien" can also mean "bode" (which might apply here) and it can be used in a more everyday sense of "predict". Just one example I found: In Patrick Flanery's I Am No One, the sentence "In the next few days I predict you will receive an email inviting you to apply for a position at an American university." gets translated as "Ich prophezeie, daß du in den nächsten Tagen eine E-mail mit der Aufforderung erhältst, dich an einer amerikanischen Universität zu bewerben." I don't think one would normally use "prophesy" here in English. ---Sluzzelin talk  17:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not normally, but perhaps in the libretto of a (rather silly) opera. Wiktionary lists the senses to predict, to foretell, to herald. --Lambiam 19:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The libretti of many operas from those days were indeed silly, nay, bizarre, absurd and incomprehensible. But the music, ah! the music ... --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  22:31, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm not doubting the translation of the libretto (where meter and euphony etc. must be considered as well). All I meant: I don't think Flanery would have written "In the next few days I prophesy you will receive an email (...)". To me, at least in modern-day parlance, English "prophesy" connotes something more specific and grave (or pompous) than the more common German "prophezeien". ---Sluzzelin talk  21:30, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the analysis. Things make more sense now that I understand "prophezeihn" as being capable of meaning "predict", silliness or non-silliness notwithstanding.  Temerarius, thank you, but I'd rather ask here, both because it's easier to follow the discussion and because it's easier to remember to come back and read the answers I've been given.  Nyttend (talk) 08:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The ascribed silliness was meant to be relevant solely with regard to the use of "prophesy" as meaning "predict" in English . --Lambiam 19:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, Lambiam, I was reacting to the bit about the opera being silly. Imagine a monarch's vizier being stiffed by a slave girl ("Wag's nicht, mich anzurühren, wenn dir deine Augen lieb sind"), and instead of punishing her, he flees from her threats, and after she and the other slaves are released, he sings a revenge song about how they ought to be hanged and impaled and cut in pieces, but again he can't do it :-)  Very silly.  Nyttend (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll only add that you can ask questions in the English language on the German-language Wikipedia Reference Desk. They're cool with it and they speak English. Temerarius (talk) 02:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The link: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Auskunft 2003:F5:6F04:6400:6CD0:9822:C161:100F (talk) 19:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC) Marco PB

Amphibians
In the Ganges article, there is the text "the Ganges is home to approximately 140 species of fish and 90 species of [x]." My question is, grammatically, should it be "90 species of amphibian" or "90 species of amphibians"? Thank you! ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk  19:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Notifying who kindly took part in discussion in the Guild of Copy Editors, where we could not reach a decision.  ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia  talk  19:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that either one is acceptable, but "species of amphibians" sounds better. As a basic test, when you Google "species of amphibian" and "species of amphibians", the results turn out to be 340k vs. 1.19M, respectively. Both usages show up in reputable publications, so I suppose it's safe to say it's not a game-breaking error.  bibliomaniac 1  5  19:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You can skirt the issue by using "fish species" and "amphibian species", the latter with 718k ghits. --Lambiam 19:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks both. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  20:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Amphibia. DuncanHill (talk) 20:30, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If you identify 90 amphibia in the Ganges, all 90 of them could be Indian bullfrogs. --Lambiam 06:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you all for the help! I initially put it in as "amphibian" but will now add an 's', as it appears to be the consensus that it sounds better, though both options may be correct. If I am incorrect in concluding this, feel free to reach out to me or make a change at Ganges. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia  talk  18:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)