• Übersicht


    They work more efficiently and more exactly ODER more exact?


    They work more efficiently and more exactly ODER more exact?

    Der ganze Satz heißt:
    Like machines, algorithms in software work more efficiently and exactly than humans do.

    Eigentlich ist es ja richtig, dass hier das Adverb steht, da sich exactly - wie efficiently - auf das Verb "work" bezieht. Trotzdem hört es sich für mich falsch an.

    Was meint ihr?
    Verfasserosterferien (937696) 28 Apr. 18, 13:59
    nicht 'exact' sondern 'accurate'

    Their work is more efficient and more accurate.
    They work more efficiently and more accurately.
    #1Verfasserpenguin (236245) 28 Apr. 18, 14:05
    I'm curious to know why it couldn't be "exactly"?
    #2VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 28 Apr. 18, 19:54
    How could you work 'exactly'? I am confident osterferien means "genau", for which 'accurate' or 'precise' are better translations.
    #3Verfasserpenguin (236245) 28 Apr. 18, 20:00
    Why could one not work exactly?
    #4VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 28 Apr. 18, 20:18
    exactly adverb
    1. in an exact manner; accurately or precisely (BE)
    #5VerfasserMiMo (236780) 28 Apr. 18, 22:18
    Ich weiß es auch nicht genau, warum hier 'exactly' nicht geht, aber hätte das wie penguin gleich korrigiert zu 'accurately'.
    #6VerfasserBraunbärin (757733) 01 Mai 18, 17:26
    Für "work more exactly" site:.uk findet Google ca. 909 Treffer ...
    #7VerfasserMiMo (236780) 02 Mai 18, 11:40

    ... Mir - und sicher auch anderen - wäre die fundierte Rückmeldung von native speakern wichtiger als die Angabe von [nur] 909 G-Treffern...

    #8VerfasserBraunbärin (757733) 02 Mai 18, 11:51
    Nun, ich bin native speaker, kann zwar keine "fundierte" Rückmeldung liefern, schließe mich aber die Vorrednerinnen #1 und #6 an. "Exactly" geht hier m.E. definitiv nicht, ich weiß ebenfalls nicht weswegen.
    #9Verfasserisabelll (918354) 02 Mai 18, 20:14
    I agree. In this example, precisely would be used and not exactly. Exactly would of course be understood immediately but it is simply not typical English native-speaker usage.

    #10VerfasserJaymack (805011) 02 Mai 18, 20:41
    I defer to anyone here who knows about algorithms, because I do not.

    But #4 is the right response / answer to the question asked in #3, How could you work 'exactly'?  

    People can work exactly. And sometimes they do.
    That is perfectly good English.
    #11VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 02 Mai 18, 22:43
    #6. #9 und #10 bieten wirklich überzeugende Begründungen.
    Und die Ablehnung von 909 Beispielen des UK-Sprachgebrauchs ist von zwingender Stringens.

    (Ohne site:.uk gibt es sogar 19.700 Treffer. Aber da sind ja sicher AE- und andere zu ignorierende E-Sprecher dabei ...)
    #12VerfasserByrdy (782769) 02 Mai 18, 23:20
    Mal interessehalber: von den 909 angegebenen Google-Treffern werden allerdings nur 2 Seiten angezeigt, darunter fand ich nur zwei (!) Treffer, wo im Text "work more exactly" so vorkommt wird wie im OP angegeben. Oder mache ich da was falsch...
    #13Verfassereastworld (238866) 02 Mai 18, 23:28
    Einige Beispiele aus den ersten google-Treffern von MiMo:

    - We have modernised the organisation to reflect our core work more exactly ....
    Hier ist 'work' ein Substantiv. Und das 'exactly' bezieht sich auf 'to reflect' - gilt also nicht für die Anfrage hier.

    Icons are never meant to be realistic in so far as physical images work. More exactly, they describe ...
    Hier ist der gesuchte string also auch nicht gültig.

    He is calling on the Assembly to define "teaching work" more exactly within ....
    Auch hier bezieht sich 'exactly' nicht auf teaching work, sondern auf das Verb 'to define'.

    ... good practice in matching work more exactly to students' ability levels 

    The sound of my iphone 6 does not work, more exactly it works badly
    Hier heißt 'more exactly' wieder 'genauer gesagt'. Gilt also auch nicht.

    usw. usf.


    @Happy Warrior, ich glaube lieber penguin, isabelll, Jaymack, und sogar meinem Sprachgefühl. Der (wohl) deutsche Schüler, den den Satz in #0 schrieb, den osterferien als Lehrer zu korrigieren hat, mag ja nicht komplett und grundfalsch sein, aber es hilft jetzt nicht zu sagen: It is perfectly good English.

    Edit: eastworld hat's auch gesehen....
    #14VerfasserBraunbärin (757733) 02 Mai 18, 23:29
    Hehe, great minds... .etc.
    #15Verfassereastworld (238866) 02 Mai 18, 23:31
    Re #12. Begründungen. Where?

    Oh, wait, here:
     ich glaube lieber penguin, isabelll, Jaymack, und sogar meinem Sprachgefühl

    Yes, of course! Nothing new there.

    #16VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 02 Mai 18, 23:38
    just my 2 cents as a NS .. I would also not use exactly here (even if I understand it). Does not "sound" right ... but maybe being Canadian, I will be dismissed for both AE and BE ... LOL

    #17VerfasserRES-can (330291) 02 Mai 18, 23:54
    Hi, RES-can.

    Your link proves the three words to be synonyms.
    #18VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 00:33
    OK, but doesn't the sentence in the original posting seem -- for whatever reason -- somehow "off" to you? Is it something you could imagine yourself saying?
    #19VerfasserMartin--cal (272273) 03 Mai 18, 01:20
    I know very little about either software or algorithms, but I don't think my ignorance about them makes any difference here, because the question here is whether a human can work efficiently and exactly. My answer is Yes, a human can.

    I am surprised that there is any controversy about it at all.
    #20VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 02:03
    Martin (#19):

    I may have misunderstood your question/comment.

    I wonder whether some people are reading the OP differently than others are?

    First, there is no doubt that one can correctly say He works exactly as told. (For example.) And that is the way I am interpreting the OP, as well--ie, in the same sense. As such, I have no problem with the OP's last eight words (at least).

    If the issue is about "One's human body works exactly." (period/end of the sentence), then that, standing alone, does sound unusual, though I am not prepared to say that it must be wrong.
    #21VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 04:56
    But it can't really mean "work exactly as humans do" because then they wouldn't be more efficient IMO.

    I don't think that anybody would object to the sentence above. But I understand the OP as in your second example and got the impression that the others did too: the machines work both more efficiently and more precisely.

    So we all seem to agree for once :-)

    Edit: It also says than in the OP, not as, so your example doesn't quite work.
    #22VerfasserGibson (418762) 03 Mai 18, 06:15
    Sorry, Gibson, my comments and examples there are confusing.

    I could not and cannot understand quite what people's objection is to the last eight words of #0. I took it that some people think that that combination of words is improper, and I was just showing that "He works exactly as told" is proper, so what linguistic rule makes the OP's formulation wrong? The last eight words seem fine to me. I can't see the problem. What makes precisely better than exactly? (Memorization, perhaps?)

    People here want to disagree with me, but no one has explained why, except that some of them have superior Sprachgefühl. 
    #23VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 06:59
    And I can't explain why either. There are some rules -- and this is apparently one of them -- that native speakers pick up when learning the language, and then internalize. Many of these rules have not (yet) been studied and compiled by grammarians, but that doesn't make them any less valid.

    We can all agree, "He works exactly as told" is fine English.

    But (and maybe you don't agree), "He works as exactly as I do" is -- for some reason I can't explain -- not OK. And the same goes for the original posting (and it has nothing to do with software or algorithms); "He works more exactly than I do" is somehow "off". For some reason -- one I can't explain, nor can I cite a grammar book here either -- this is not a "normal" English sentence. It appears, on the surface, to be grammatical, but it is not something I would say.

    I'm a little surprised that you don't have the same feeling about it (if indeed you don't).
    #24VerfasserMartin--cal (272273) 03 Mai 18, 07:46
    Happy Warrior: "People here want to disagree with me, but no one has explained why, except that some of them have superior Sprachgefühl." 

    May I point out a few things to you?

    1) I'm afraid you haven't "explained" "logically" either why you think the English sentence in #0 is fine. Yet, you insist/ed on my "Begründungen". The examples you choose in support of your claim are not relevant here.

    2) No need to be ironic about my mentioning my "Sprachgefühl", for God's sake.
    I did not write 'superior' anywhere.
    I do not generally claim that my Sprachgefühl is superior to yours.

    3) "People here want to disagree with me":
    Yes, this is what I feel you are (like 1, 2 years ago) constantly trying to both "construct" and then fight against. Essentially, you will have to solve for yourself that subjective feeling of being left out or being wronged.
    This thread could have ended in #3. ... Oh well...

    Hope my English is not too flawed.
    #25VerfasserBraunbärin (757733) 03 Mai 18, 08:58
    We're surprising each other, then, Martin. (-:

    I see literally nothing wrong (or even unusual) about "He works as exactly as I do"--insofar as the formulation itself is concerned. I'd agree that that sentence itself would rarely ever occur, because it would have to arise in a circumstance in which two people were being compared for exactly how exactly they work.

    but it is not something I would say.

    I might not say it either, but I would not avoid it for being wrong--I don't think it is wrong.

    I am not even remotely trying to suggest that exactly is better than accurate or precise. All I'm saying is that I'm surprised that so many here deem exactly to be wrong.
    #26VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 09:02
    He works more exactly than I do - I agree that this is not typical English, but I don't find it so wrong as to be dramatic. I would normally also say accurately or precisely (UK/Irish speaker).
    He works as exactly as I do - I do not find this "wrong" either, but I would probably say, "He works just as accurately (or precisely) as I do".
    Maybe we avoid exactly sometimes so as not to confuse it with another usage:
    "I'm not working, exactly, just pretending to." In this sentence, exactly is used differently and the comma is needed, of course, in writing, but in speech the pause between working and exactly can be so small as to be almost imperceptible. I think that's what I felt reminded of when I first read the original query.
    Part of the argument here is that "typical usage" also counts as correctness, even if it can be hard to explain. It's just the way people talk and sometimes other usages could be correct but they simply don't sound familiar and are therefore considered "wrong". I'm sure there are many other similar examples.
    #27VerfasserJaymack (805011) 03 Mai 18, 09:29
    I also find the OP's use of "exactly" odd. Jaymack's reasoning with respect to how "exactly" is often used makes sense to me, i.e. interference from another, possibly more common usage.
    #28VerfasserThirith (1037221) 03 Mai 18, 11:43
    #18 HW
    Yes, they are synonymous in meaning, but that's just it, isn't it? There is an innate subtlety in meaning that can't be explained, but "feeling" it can make make all the difference.
    Obviously, everyone's feelings are not the same it would seem :) :)
    #29VerfasserRES-can (330291) 03 Mai 18, 15:03
    Agree with #10: more efficiently and precisely.
    #30VerfasserStravinsky (637051) 03 Mai 18, 15:42
    Wenn man solche Diskussionen führt, sollte man vielleicht genau hinsehen, bevor man etwas als Argument anführt, das gar keines ist.

    Die Tatsache, dass exactly als Adverb im Wörterbuch steht, sagt noch nichts über die Verwendung aus. (#5) Niemand hat bestritten, dass das Wort existiert. Es geht um die idiomatische Verwendung.

    #12: Und die Ablehnung von 909 Beispielen des UK-Sprachgebrauchs ist von zwingender Stringens. [Stringenz] (Ohne site:.uk gibt es sogar 19.700 Treffer. Aber da sind ja sicher AE- und andere zu ignorierende E-Sprecher dabei ...)

    Dein Sarkasmus, Byrdy, ist völlig fehl am Platze. Wie oft muss man darauf hinweisen, wie mit Gugel-Treffern umzugehen ist? Wenn du die Navigationsleiste von G. benutzt und auf die letzte dort angegebene Trefferseite gehst, wirst du feststellen, dass die 19.700 Treffer zu 90 werden. Und in diesen 90 stecken jede Menge Falschmeldungen wie die in #14 angeführten (work als Substantiv; Satzgrenze; exactly bezogen auf ein anderes Verb, übersetzte Quellen). Leider kann man nicht gezielt nur die verbliebenen Treffer durchsuchen, aber die Perspektive ist klar, ja?

    #18: Your link proves the three words to be synonyms.

    Bitte genau lesen. (Es ist das Link in #17 gemeint). Die erste Antwort sagt, dass jedes dieser Wörter (accurate, precise, exact) zur Definition des jeweils anderen herangezogen werden kann und belegt das mit der Definition der Substantive (precision usw.). Das heißt nicht, dass die Wörter synonym sind, sindern nur, dass sich ihre Bedeutungen überschneiden. Die zweite Erklärung gleich darunter geht genau auf diesen "degree of difference" ein -- so, wie das auch verschiedene Teilnehmer hier empfinden.

    #21: First, there is no doubt that one can correctly say He works exactly as told. (For example.) And that is the way I am interpreting the OP, as well--ie, in the same sense.

    Nein, die Formulierungen to work more exactly than humans und to work exactly as told sind zwei grammatisch völlig unterschiedliche Konstruktionen. In deinem Beispiel gehört exactly nicht zu work, sondern zu as told. (Probe: du kannst das Verb austauschen: he responded exactly as told -- und du kannst exactly austauschen: more or less as told; beide Proben zeigen, dass nicht das Verb work durch das Adverb qualifiziert wird wie im OP, sondern das "as told"). Die Ähnlichkeit ist rein oberflächlich.

    Es ist schon seltsam, HW: Normalerweise verteidigst du das Sprachgefühl gegen das Regelbuch und beschwerst dich darüber, dass irgendwer Regeln aufstellt oder blind anwendet, die nichts mit dem "wahren Leben" (so wie HW es sieht) zu tun haben. Aber hier tust du das Gegenteil, denn keine Regel verbietet das "exactly" im OP. Nur das Sprachgefühl (von inzwischen 6 NES, wenn ich richtig zähle) spricht dagegen.

    Ich neige dazu, #27 zuzustimmen und vermute auch wie #28, dass "familiarity" sich aus der Wahl zwischen konkurrierenden Verwendungen ergibt. (Vgl. z.B. he didn't exactly insult me -- würde man bei dieser Verwendung jetzt umgekehrt precisely oder accurately als wirkliche Synonyme empfinden?)
    #31VerfassersebastianW (382026) 03 Mai 18, 19:32
    Re #31.
    Bitte genau lesen. (Es ist das Link in #17 gemeint).

    Yes, I know (and knew). I was referring to that very link, thanks.

    Perhaps you should Bitte genau lesen:
    Das heißt nicht, dass die Wörter synonym sind

    RES-can's link calls them all synonyms. That is what I was referencing to RES-can.

    Nein, die Formulierungen to work more exactly than humans und to work exactly as told sind zwei grammatisch völlig unterschiedliche Konstruktionen.

    Yes, I know (and knew). Bitte genau lesen #23.

    Es ist schon seltsam, HW: Normalerweise verteidigst du das Sprachgefühl gegen das Regelbuch (etc.)

    I simply speak English. I make no calculations, one way or the other, about rule books or Sprachgefühl.
    #32VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 03 Mai 18, 22:38
    Nur das Sprachgefühl (von inzwischen 6 NES, wenn ich richtig zähle) spricht dagegen.
    What do you mean exactly by Sprachgefühl? It's not just that I (one person of the six) don't use exactly that way. It's not a personal preference. I've never heard it used by the thousands of peple I've talked to in my (quite long) life!

    #33VerfasserJaymack (805011) 04 Mai 18, 08:43
    Nur das Sprachgefühl (von inzwischen 6 NES, wenn ich richtig zähle) 

    Make that seven. And I can echo #33: I've never heard it used by the thousands of peple I've talked to in my (quite long) life!

    Just adding this for those whose ideas and decisions are sometimes informed by feedback from native speakers, not to join any "argument."
    #34VerfasserJanette B. (1227601) 04 Mai 18, 10:11
    Ich habe das schon richtig verstanden, Jaymack. Ich habe "Sprachgefühl" gesagt, weil niemand eine grammatische Begründung oder eine Regel dafür anführen konnte, warum "exactly" hier nicht so gebraucht werden kann. (Es hat auch niemand linguistisch stichhaltige Argumente für die Richtigkeit dieses Gebrauchs anführen können.) Ich bin schon davon ausgegangen, dass ihr hier keine Privatmeinung äußert, sondern dass diese Meinung repräsentativ für "a thousand people" ist.

    re #32 *shrug*
    #35VerfassersebastianW (382026) 04 Mai 18, 15:00
    Neither the writers, nor the editors of the following books saw any need to replace exactly with either accurately or precisely, although either synonym would - as in the OP - be suitable.

    "Survey work was special because it was both extensive and intensive (most sciences are one or the other) and conducted in places that were neither domesticated nor wild, but liminal — inner frontiers, twilight zones. Survey parties sought total inventories of faunas and floras but were obliged to work exactly and thoroughly in places more appropriate to outdoor recreation than to exact science."
    Robert E. Kohler, All Creatures: Naturalists, Collectors, and Biodiversity, 1850-1950, p. 180 (https://books.google.de/books?isbn=0691125392)
    "The plane is held in much the same manner as the smoothing plane. Care must be taken to finish the two sides of the rebate at right angles to each other, and to work exactly to the gauge lines, otherwise the rebate is sure to be uneven or worked in holes."
    Paul N. Hasluck, The Handyman's Guide: Essential Woodworking Tools and Techniques, p. 189 (https://books.google.de/books?isbn=1626366586)

    "By definition, to gauge is to measure, set out, and work exactly objects of standard size so as to conform to strictly defined limits, and this term is eminently suitable for this class of brickwork."
    Gerard C. J. Lynch, The History of Gauged Brickwork: Conservation, Repair and Modern Application, p. xxxv (https://books.google.de/books?isbn=0750682728)

    An uncommon usage or one unfamiliar to some subset of native speakers is not automatically wrong, although it may seem that way to them, or get their Sprachgefühl tingling...
    #36Verfassercovellite (520987) 04 Mai 18, 17:54
    #36, covellite
    ... my last comment here :)
    Strangely enough, I do not find your examples jarring, but I did find it a bit "off-sounding" in the OP
    ... only one of a subset of NS
    Have a great weekend!
    #37VerfasserRES-can (330291) 04 Mai 18, 20:01
    That's partly what descriptive lingusitics is about. It's not about a grammatical rule, it's about usage.
    #38VerfasserJaymack (805011) 05 Mai 18, 10:25
    Thanks for the examples and commentary, covellite. (#36)

    Just a brief comment to (hopefully) conclude my input to this thread:

    "Exactly" is an English word! If one prefers a different word, that's fine. It should (often) be no problem, either way.
    #39VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 05 Mai 18, 16:18
    Im OP wurde nach "work more exactly" gefragt. Ich (DMS) verstehe "exactly" als "100%", die anderen als "so genau wie möglich".

    Das Fazit, das ich für Lernende wie osterferien (und mich) aus diesem Faden mitnehme, ist Folgendes (und bestätigt meinen eigenen bisherigen Sprachgebrauch): Ich werde *"work more exactly" nicht verwenden, um nicht Gefahr zu laufen, unidiomatisch zu klingen. ENS können natürlich machen, was sie wollen - tun sie ja sowieso.

    Und nun suche ich den alten Faden dazu, dass Muttersprachler zur Erzielung von gewissen Effekten von der Norm abweichen "dürfen", Zweitsprachler aber nicht.

    EDIT: Hab's gefunden, war gar nicht auf LEO, aber trotzdem lesenswert: http://www.sprachlog.de/2013/08/15/keine-krea...
    #40VerfasserRaudona (255425) 05 Mai 18, 19:49
    I agree that the problem is mainly with "more exactly".
    The subtle differences between synonyms, in meaning or implication, are often very difficult to describe, but I would say the idea of exact being (100%) free of errors or imprecision is one of the points that make "more exactly" problematic.
    I once saw an explanation using π. It's not an exact fit in this context but I think it's relevant to native speakers' intuitive understanding of the meaning. AIUI:
    The ratio of the circumference of a true circle to its diameter is exactly π (though in real life there may be an implicit precision depending on, inter alia, the measuring equipment – and quantum mechanics, I suppose).
    If the software produces "circles" with a consistent ratio of 3.7 (at a given position), it is more accurate than software that produces circles with a consistent ratio of 4.2.
    If the software produces circles with a consistent ratio of 3.14159, it is more precise than software which produces circles with a ratio of 3.1.
    Exact may  also be used to mean something like careful, conscientious, scrupulous, but I don't think that is meant here.
    And "more precise" can also mean something like more detailed.
    #41VerfasserMikeE (236602) 06 Mai 18, 08:39
    With genuine respect, I disagree with at least part of MikeE's comments--particularly the first part: the problem is mainly with "more exactly"..

    I don't see why one cannot correctly say "more exactly." Of course, something is either exact or it is not. But one can keep working towards exactness--every day working more exactly.

    And a rather famous document over in this part of the world begins with "in order to form a more perfect union . . .." (United States Constitution.)

    Only perfect is perfect, but one can strive to improve, to be more perfect.
    #42VerfasserHappyWarrior (964133) 07 Mai 18, 08:41
    I would also tend to put "more exactly" in the same class as "more perfectly" (or "more uniquely").
    You could say that software works more perfectly than humans, or that the results are more error-free, but I don't think it would be particularly idiomatic in explanatory prose.

    The more recent Treaty of Rome talks of an "ever closer union" (which is also an interesting concept, logically).

    I'm not saying that you cannot say "more exactly", but there would need to be some special stylistic or semantic reason to do so.

    There is also the question of the possible semantic differences between adjectives and adverbs.
    It appears to be the use of an adverb ("exactly") in reference to the result (rather than the manner) of an action that worried the OP. ("in order to form a union more perfectly"? ) .
    #43VerfasserMikeE (236602) 07 Mai 18, 10:01
  • Pinyin
  • Tastatur
  • Sonderzeichen
  • Lautschrift
:-) automatisch zu 🙂 umgewandelt