Werbung - LEO ohne Werbung? LEO Pur
LEO

Sie scheinen einen AdBlocker zu verwenden.

Wollen Sie LEO unterstützen?

Dann deaktivieren Sie AdBlock für LEO, spenden Sie oder nutzen Sie LEO Pur!

LEO Pur
 
  •  

  • Übersicht

    Sprachlabor

    "enclosed please find"

    36­ Antworten
    Betrifft

    "enclosed please find"

    Kommentar
    Das wurde hier schon oft angefragt.

    Was sagen bitte die BE und AE Muttersprachler dazu? My husband, (AE) native speaker, agrees with Garner's usage.

    According to Garner's Modern American Usage: *enclosed please find; *please find enclosed; *enclosed herewith; *enclosed herein. 

    These phrases--common in commercial and legal correspondence--are archaic deadwood for here are, enclosed is, I've enclosed, or the like.
    Interestingly, business-writing texts have consistently condemned the phrases since the late 19th century.

    ● "Business words and expressions borrowed from an earlier generation can make your writing sound artificial and pedantic. Every letter will read like a form letter, and you will sound bored or, even worse, boring. Thinking of substitute phrases is easy if you put your mind to it. Consider some of these revisions:...Enclosed please find [becomes] I am enclosing".
    Maryann V. Piotrowski, Effective Business Writing 53 (1989)
    Garner's Modern American Usage © 2009
    (p.303)


    Phrasen und Beispiele.
    Siehe Wörterbuch: enclosed

    Should these be marked:archaic (AE)?)



    Siehe auch: enclosed vs attached - #14
    BTW: 'Please find enclosed' is rather old fashioned.
    Many modern companies now use 'I am enclosing....'.
    © #14 Mini Cooper [Brit.] (Sep. 07)


    http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/653/01/
    I have enclosed the city's documents..


    *Invariably inferior words and phrases are marked with an asterisk (*)
    Garner's Modern American Usage © 2009
    (p.303)

    Thank you.
    Verfasserme1 (236101) 02 Jun. 13, 22:23
    Kommentar
    I don't find it archaic at all. I still use (and frequently read) the phrase, or its e-mail equivalent, attached please find.
    #1Verfasser dude (253248) 02 Jun. 13, 22:55
    Kommentar
    Ich hab' da auch keine Bedenken ...
    #2Verfasser no me bré (700807) 02 Jun. 13, 22:56
    Kommentar
    Common business usage.
    Enclosed please find - for letters
    Attached please fine - for email
    #3Verfasser RES-can (330291) 02 Jun. 13, 23:00
    Kommentar
    @ dude, Danke! Ja, ich lese es auch noch, aber ich finde es veraltet. (archaisch)..
    #4Verfasserme1 (236101) 02 Jun. 13, 23:08
    Kommentar
    @ all, thank you. It must be BE usage. :-)
    #5Verfasserme1 (236101) 02 Jun. 13, 23:11
    Kommentar
    Glad to hear that it's not considered "old-fashioned / archaic," because I use both "Please find enclosed / attached," which we were taught in business correspondence all those years ago :-)
    #6Verfasser Carly-AE (237428) 02 Jun. 13, 23:12
    Kommentar
    @ Carly-AE,
    Garner's (Modern AE Usage) is 'the authority on grammar, usage, and style. :-)
    #7Verfasserme1 (236101) 02 Jun. 13, 23:23
    Kommentar
    I would expect or at least not be surprised to read "Enclosed/attached please find ..." (or, Please find enclosed/attached ... ) for important material from an institution or a serious business or law firm. Probably not from a tourist agency or otherwise for informal information.

    On the other hand, if the tone of the correspondence is a letter from one person to another (and maybe not the first one), then perhaps prefer "here are, enclosed is, I've enclosed, or the like" or "I am enclosing" in the body of a sentence.

    I don't really agree with Garner on this (among a number of other points), except as to: *enclosed herewith; *enclosed herein, which should be retired (especially if you are not a very old and old-fashioned lawyer).
    #8Verfasser Mike - US (919790) 02 Jun. 13, 23:47
    Kommentar
    Garner is, perhaps uncharacteristically, very clear:

    ". . . - common in commercial and legal correspondence . . ."

    That does not suggest "archaic" in the dictionary sense (unless you are convinced that Garner is very seldom right).

    #9VerfasserMikeE (236602) 03 Jun. 13, 01:02
    Kommentar
    It seems to me that Garner is saying that to the extent they're still used in commercial and legal correspondence, they're hackneyed and should be avoided, and I would tend to agree. It's not a serious faux pas to use the empty phrase 'please find,' but there's also no real need for it. The recipient shouldn't actually have to hunt for the the enclosures/attachments, track them down, in order to find them; the point is just that they're there.
    #10Verfasser hm -- us (236141) 03 Jun. 13, 01:34
    Kommentar
    Garner's Modern American Usage: The authority on grammar, usage, and style seems to be the title, or at least the publisher's blurb. Take any given point for what it's worth.

    Of course, that's often a lot more than entries in dictionaries that give little if any guidance as to usage and style.
    #11Verfasser Mike - US (919790) 03 Jun. 13, 01:51
    Kommentar
    I don't think Garner is the only authority, but he's a pretty good authority, most of the time. I would guess that other AE usage guides might also recommend against set business and legal phrases that now sound stilted. I think it was Norbert who used to have one published by Merriam-Webster; maybe there are also others.

    You could see what current books on business writing say, but I'm not sure there still are any/many. Commercial correspondence may just be a dying art, one that's much less emphasized these days, as few businesspeople now have personal secretaries, and even many who do just write more of their own e-mails, where the style is much more casual, so that 'please find' could seem even more out of place.
    #12Verfasser hm -- us (236141) 03 Jun. 13, 02:03
    Kommentar
    There may be a difference between AE and BE, but the whole point about "Please find enclosed" is that it is a standard, conventional phrase (aka hackneyed) like the colon - or the equals sign in mathematics.

    If any non-conventional wording is used, it is necessary to make it clear whether any importance should be attached to the particular wording.

    Of course, different wording may be in fashion at any given time, so "Please find enclosed . . . " might be replaced by the equally conventional "I am enclosing . . .". The main point is that there should be a very limited number of conventional phrases, with a clearly defined (and minimal) meaning (in this case to the effect that the document is enclosed with this letter - and probably that the recipient should do something if he does not find it).

    The formality of such phrases also indicates that it a communication from the person named in the letterhead to the person it is addressed to. In a letter from Noggins & Noggins PLC to Acme Widgets, Inc. I expect a communication from one company to the other, so I don't really expect to see the pronoun "I".
    #13VerfasserMikeE (236602) 03 Jun. 13, 02:36
    Kommentar
    See, maybe that's where we differ. I don't think Noggins & Noggins signs anonymously with 'N&N,' or generates entire letters by computer, independently of human input. I figure that if an actual person has taken the trouble to write the letter, he or she might as well indulge in a pronoun.
    #14Verfasser hm -- us (236141) 03 Jun. 13, 07:56
    Kommentar
    The recipient shouldn't actually have to hunt for the the enclosures/attachments, track them down, in order to find them;
    most of us have read/written "please find..." umpteen times, but thanks to hm us for pointing out that it's actually rather an odd phrase; I, for one, hadn't thought about it at all. :-)
    #15Verfassermikefm (760309) 03 Jun. 13, 14:38
    Kommentar
    #5: It must be BE usage.

    ?
    #16VerfasserKinkyAfro (587241) 03 Jun. 13, 14:45
    Kommentar
    'Every letter will read like a form letter, and you will sound bored or, even worse, boring'

    Aber ist nicht der Verwendung von Standardformel im Geschäftsverkehr dazu gedacht, das Lesen zu vereinfachen. Mit einem normalen Geschäftsbrief will ich weder unterhalten, noch aufrütteln, sondern meinst irgendeine Tätigkeit initiieren. Ich selbst bin meistens erfreut, wenn mir ein kurzer langweiliger Brief auf einem Blick die Informationen liefert, die ich brauche, ohne dass ich eine literariche Exegese starten muss, um zu wissen, was die Person nun will.

    Für einen Vertriebsbrief mögen andere Kriterien gelten.
    #17Verfasser wor (335727) 03 Jun. 13, 15:34
    Kommentar
    BTW, a German colleague said she was taught to write in der Anlage, as the word anbei was to be discouraged. What do the natives think?
    #18Verfasser Stravinsky (637051) 03 Jun. 13, 16:39
    Kommentar
    Ich sehe das im Deutschen ähnlich wie im Englischen.

    "In der Anlage ..." klingt ein wenig steif (für mich allerdings nicht veraltet - ich verwende es auch noch), aber passend für entsprechende Geschäftsbriefe.

    Pflege ich mit der angesprochenen Person einen etwas lockereren Umgangston, oder handelt es sich um ein privates Schreiben, verwende ich "anbei", oder "hier kommt", oder "wie versprochen schicke ich dir ...".
    #19Verfasser Fragezeichen (240970) 03 Jun. 13, 17:05
    Kommentar
    @#18:
    anbei klingt wirklich "archaisch"; "in der Anlage" kommt mir auch seltsam vor. Ich kenne nur:

    Anlage(n): und dann die Aufzählung ((n) nur wenn es mehrere sind).

    Für mich wäre es noch eine Frage, ob "embedded" oder "enclosed" oder "attached" jeweils einen Unterschied macht.
    #20Verfasser waltherwithh (554696) 03 Jun. 13, 17:09
    Kommentar
    http://books.google.de/books?id=Jz_-yyHwMGcC...

    A sure sign of an inexperienced writer, in fact, is the obvious attempt to sound too "businesslike." As per your request, please find enclosed herewith a check in ...

    The "inexperienced" really galls me! Personally, I adapt my business correspondence to the type of letter, to whom I'm writing, etc., and will continue to do so. Same holds true for salutations and closing phrases in e-mails (also adapted to whom I'm writing). That's what professionalism boils down to.

    Every letter will read like a form letter, and you will sound bored or, even worse, boring'
    Most of my professional life was spent working as a PA to executives, which entailed answering quite a few of their letters/e-mails on their behalf. How did I managed to keep my job, if I was "inexperienced"? :-) Only lost my last one, when the CIO (my boss) lost his to restructuring measures.

    Wonder whether the "Please find enclosed" was derived from the French "Merci de trouver ci-joint..."? Slightly OT, but my French co-workers also started off e-mails with "Merci de faire...whatever." I once replied in English to an e-mail, and wrote:

    Dear X,
    Thank you for promptly sending me your...

    Almost immediately, X replied with:
    But Carly, I already sent you that yesterday!! :-)
    #21Verfasser Carly-AE (237428) 03 Jun. 13, 17:36
    Kommentar
    @ #16
    Entschuldigung, das war eine ungenaue Formulierung.
    Das war nur eine Antwort (oder Frage) fuer RES-can. IIRC she wrote in other threads that Canadians speak/write BE.

    #10
    "The recipient shouldn't actually have to hunt for the the enclosures/attachments, track them down, in order to find them; the point is just that they're there."


    Das wollte ich gestern auch schreiben, aber es wird hier nicht gerne gesehen wenn deutsche Muttersprachler widersprechen.

    I can't find my husband's books.

    hm--us knows that I like to 'google'.
    SCNR
    "Enclosed please find..."--This phrase, more than any other in the world of business writing, epitomizes the lawyer-like way people start to write when they are either desperate to avoid using a pronoun like "I" or simply love to repeat phrases they have seen in other letters without ever thinking for themselves. After all, what do you have to "find"? 
    http://www.writingworkshop.com/pandc.htm

    "Please see attached" is simply too dull--and it's inaccurate. We don't want our readers to see the attachment. (I see a pile of papers on my desk, but my next step is to hide it in a file drawer.) :-)
    We also don't want them to find it. (It's not lost or hidden, is it? So "Please find attached" is no improvement. 
    http://www.businesswritingblog.com/business_w...
    Lynn Gaertner-Johnston, founder of Syntax Training in Seattle, Washington.
    http://www.syntaxtraining.com/
    http://www.businesswritingblog.com/about.html

    Let's agree to disagree.
    @ all, thank you.

     
    #22Verfasserme1 (236101) 03 Jun. 13, 18:07
    Kommentar
    Wonder whether the "Please find enclosed" was derived from the French "Merci de trouver ci-joint..."? (#21)

    French business correspondence is amusing, e.g. Soyez assurée, madame, de mes salutations distinguées (with a bunch of roses ci-joint for good measure).
    #23Verfasser Stravinsky (637051) 03 Jun. 13, 18:20
    Kommentar
    I know, Stravinsky :-) Not only that, the closing phrase indicates the "politeness level" :-) If I was writing to the CEO in Paris, I would have started my e-mail off with:
    "Veuillez trouver ci-joint," rather than "Merci de trouver.." :-)
    #24Verfasser Carly-AE (237428) 03 Jun. 13, 18:43
    Kommentar
    @#21, if memory serves, 'please' itself, in earlier times, was 'may it please you to' which would also explain the 'find' in earlier posts as a way to connect 'May it please you to' and 'I have enclosed.'
    #25Verfasserdave7 (832777) 03 Jun. 13, 18:56
    Kommentar
    #22 me1 - it wasn't me in #16 :)

    In another thread, I indicated that sometimes we tend to blend BE/AE spelling... but stylistically we are really more AE.

    I work in a very large corporation, and in fact, a lot of the letters ARE form letters, or at least templates which can then be personalized to some extent.
    'Please find enclosed' is still considered standard for a business letter (not only legal); 'attached' for emails, because you don't really "enclose" anything as such. (my #3)
    Putting a pronoun in as such is not good "business form", although as has been indicated, if you know the addressee personally, of course you can say something like: I'm enclosing... or whatever. NOT your "official" letter or email.

    btw - for our French business letters, it's always "veuillez trouver ci-joint" (not only to CEOs, but also to clients)
    #26Verfasser RES-can (330291) 03 Jun. 13, 19:35
    Kommentar
    RES, You perfectly expressed what I was trying to say...been a rough day :-) I only used "merci de trouver ci-joint" when writing to people in our French IT dept., i.e., those who directly reported to my boss - never ever to our French suppliers (we were the clients:-))
    #27Verfasser Carly-AE (237428) 03 Jun. 13, 22:49
    Kommentar
    #14

    "In a business letter, there are usually four persons involved:
    - the company that is responsible for any commitments
    - the person who signs the letter (on behalf of the company)
    - the company it is addressed to
    - the person who is expected to deal with it

    I presume this is the reason for the old convention of writing, for example, "Attn. Mr. Malone . . . Dear Sirs . . . "

    In an ideal world, I would prefer it if people who signed formal letters wrote "I" only when they expected to personally pay or receive any money involved.

    "Dear Bugsy,
    I am enclosing the test results you wanted and look forward to receiving the money you promised."
    (:-)

    It is a pity that nobody found an adequate modern equivalent for "Dear Sirs".
    #28VerfasserMikeE (236602) 04 Jun. 13, 04:27
    Kommentar
    @#20:
    anbei klingt wirklich "archaisch"; "in der Anlage" kommt mir auch seltsam vor. Ich kenne nur:
    Anlage(n): und dann die Aufzählung ((n) nur wenn es mehrere sind).
    Für mich wäre es noch eine Frage, ob "embedded" oder "enclosed" oder "attached" jeweils einen Unterschied macht.

    In der Anlage finden Sie und anbei habe ich in 'grauer Vorzeit' noch gelernt, beides ist v. a. in amtlichen bzw. juristischen Schreiben nach wie vor üblich. In 'normalen' Geschäftsbriefen hat sich in letzter Zeit die Formulierung beiliegend erhalten Sie durchgesetzt.

    Ob "embedded" oder "enclosed" oder "attached" ist meines Wissens bei Verträgen, Urkunden und anderen juristischen Schriftsätzen von Bedeutung:
    - embedded heißt 'in den Fließtext eines anderen Dokumentes eingebettet', z. B. eingeklebte Fotos oder Pläne (auch sowas gibt's heutzutage noch) in fadengehefteten Urkunden, Geschäftsbriefe mit integriertem Vertragstext, etc.;
    - enclosed sind alle Arten Beilagen und Anlagen
    - attached wird synonym zu enclosed verwendet, kann aber auch heißen, dass die Anlagen hinten angeheftet und mit dem Dokument untrennbar verbunden sind (z. B. Vertrag + x Anlagen als ein gemeinsames Dokument mit versiegelten Heftklammern)
    #29Verfasser Leseratz (238114) 05 Jun. 13, 11:16
    Kommentar
    You can find this in the archive if the search ever works again, but just to review:

    e-mail:
    attached, as an attachment

    snail mail (on paper):
    enclosed, (below the signature:) Enclosure(s) 

    'Embedded' is a technical term, so you wouldn't mention it (unless you meant living on the battlefield with soldiers).
    #30Verfasser hm -- us (236141) 05 Jun. 13, 18:49
    Kommentar
    Noch eine Randbemerkung zur deutschen Seite: In einem Geschäftskorrespondenzkurs an der Uni, lang ist's her, war unser Dozent überzeugt: "Schreiben Sie nie 'In der Anlage erhalten Sie'! Wissen Sie denn, wann der Empfänger Mittagspause hat und in die Anlage gehen kann? Schreiben Sie: 'Als Anlage erhalten Sie'."
    #31Verfasserhilfesuch (682314) 05 Jun. 13, 19:27
    Kommentar
    hihihi, danke 'hilfesuch', das hat Sketch-Potential und ist eine einprägsame Eselsbrücke für Schüler:
    Ich stell mir grad einen Mail-Empfänger vor, der da zu lesen kriegt: "In der Anlage erhalten Sie heute um 12 Uhr mittags den Vertrag (überreicht)."
    Was meinst du, wie der aus der Wäsche schaut.

    OT: Kürzlich hat jemand in einer Werbekampagne 'zu den Akten legen' wörtlich genommen und auf erschöpfte Angestellte bezogen. Witziger Einfall.
    #32Verfasser Leseratz (238114) 06 Jun. 13, 16:41
    Kommentar
    Completely OT - der Begriff "bitte freimachen" auf Briefumschläge habe ich auf ein "kostenträchtige" Art und Weise kennengelernt. Ich sollte irgendetwas an irgendjemand zurücksenden, ein adressierte Umschlag war mitgeliefert worden, auf dem: bitte freimachen, stand. Verstanden habe ich wegen (frei)machen: Postgebühr übernimmt Empfänger - tja, kam zurück, und ich mußte ein deftiger Strafgebühr bezahlen.
    #33Verfasser Carly-AE (237428) 06 Jun. 13, 16:58
    Kommentar
    Re #0 and related.

    I do not always agree with Garner, but IMO he is correct on this issue.
    #34VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 28 Mär. 18, 11:29
    Kommentar
    @Happy Warrior:
     
    #12 ff.
     
    I remember having this exchange at the time, and I remember most of us disagreeing with you.
    #35Verfasser Stravinsky (637051) 28 Mär. 18, 21:19
    Kommentar
    I'm aware of that.

    What is the point of your comment?
    #36VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 29 Mär. 18, 03:19
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
 
en
Englisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
fr
Französisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
es
Spanisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
it
Italienisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
zh
Chinesisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
ru
Russisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
pt
Portugiesisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
pl
Polnisch ⇔ Deutsch
 
de
ForumTrainerKurse
 
en
Englisch ⇔ Spanisch
 
es
ForumTrainerKurse
 
en
Englisch ⇔ Französisch
 
fr
ForumTrainerKurse
 
en
Englisch ⇔ Russisch
 
ru
ForumTrainerKurse
 
es
Spanisch ⇔ Portugiesisch
 
pt
ForumTrainerKurse
Hallo
 ­ automatisch zu ­ ­ umgewandelt