From thielr@Mailer.Uni-Marburg.DE Sun Sep 3 02:14:32 2000 Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id CAA163798 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 02:14:27 -0700 Received: from Mailer.Uni-Marburg.DE (Mailer.Uni-Marburg.DE [137.248.1.76]) by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id CAA20655 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 02:14:26 -0700 Received: from laptop (mppp010.ppp.Uni-Marburg.DE [137.248.76.10]) by Mailer.Uni-Marburg.DE (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA63022 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:13:45 +0200 From: "Rainer Thiel" To: Subject: RE: "Doch" auf Deutsch (a bit of holiday-weekend TAN) Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:13:41 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: > Herr A: "Habe ich recht?" or "Habe ich nicht recht?" >=20 > Herr B: "Doch, du bis nicht in Ordnung!" or "Doch, du bis im = unrecht!" >=20 > Would that work? >=20 > I personally do not think so. I didn't contribute to this thread yesterday because I felt that after = Ulrich's exhaustive remarks I had nothing to add. But as Ulrich hasn't = responded yet to this aspect this Sunday morning, perhaps I may step in = here. I didn't take Ulrich's remarks to deny "that the refutational aspect is = achieved by the mechanism of a self-confirmation or a self-affirmation", = and in any case I should second this characterisation. Strong (stressed) = "doch" is often used to oppose someone else who has challenged a = statement previously made by yourself, and in this case the other = person's phrase must have been negative to be answered by a clause with = strong "doch", which itself is always to be found in an affirmative = clause. The real core of this use is to re-state, or to state energically, a = point denied by someone else. This point need not have been stated = previously by yourself. For example, if someone ends a longer statement = with the words "darin d=FCrfte ich wohl kaum fehlgehen", you could = challenge his or her point by "Doch, da haben Sie ganz Unrecht". There is a second use of strong (stressed) "doch", though, in which it = can be used in either positive or negative clauses. I should describe = this use as a statement of some expectation not come true, either good = or bad, either of someone else or (more often) of your own. If you = expected a friend to come by a certain time, you could say "Offenbar hat = er/sie es _doch_ nicht geschafft", and if you had hoped your house would = not be affected by the fires, "Nun ist es _doch_ abgebrannt". Here, too, = the core of the meaning is opposition to a statement, thought, = expectation, and I suppose this should be considered the primary meaning = of stressed "doch" which that dealt with above probably evolved from. All this concerns strong (stressed) "doch". It may be in part true of = unstressed "doch", as well, but in much less measure often even hard to = recognize. For example, the common unstressed "doch" in emphatic = admonitions like "Hau doch ab!" equals rather Latin "Fac abeas" or Greek = "a)ll' a)/piqi" [Classical content!], but I think I'd better restrain = from (re-)dealing with all these uses of unstressed "doch". Priv.-Doz. Dr. phil. Rainer Thiel, Hochschuldozent - Paper mail: Univ. FB 10, Klass. Phil. - D-35032 Marburg, Germany (EU) - For more information and for my PGP public key check my homepage: http://staff-www.uni-marburg.de/~thielr/ .