• Special characters
  • Lautschrift

equivalente Ausdrücken im Schriftenglisch

13 replies   
ich suche gerade nach equivalenten Ausdrücken im Schriftenglisch für die automatische Verbesserung im Sprachtrainer.
Bisher haben wir folgende Equivalenzen definiert:

I am => I'm
you are => you're
You are => You're
He is => He's
he is => he's
She is => She's
she is => she's
It is => It's
it is => it's
We are => We're
we are => we're
They are => They're
they are => they're

Would not => Wouldn't
would not => wouldn't
Should not => Shouldn't
should not => shouldn't
Could not => Couldn't
could not => couldn't
Must not => Mustn't
must not => mustn't
Can not => Can't
can not => can't
Is not => Isn't
is not => isn't
Are not => Aren't
are not => aren't
Shall not => Shan't
shall not => shan't

Where is => Where's
where is => where's
Who is => Who's
who is => who's
What is => What's
what is => what's
Why is => Why's
why is => why's
When is => When's
when is => when's
How is => How's
how is => how's

Vielleicht fällt ja jemandem noch etwas ein, danke.
AuthorFabian (LEO-Team) (1) 06 Dec 07, 10:23
*pawlowein* - gibt's mehr Kontext? ;-)

Aber ernsthaft - im "Schriftenglisch" sollten diese Kontraktionen doch vermieden werden ...
#1AuthorBacon [de] (264333) 06 Dec 07, 10:26
I will - I'll
I would - I'd
I have - I've

is this the sort of thing you mean?
#2Authorodondon irl06 Dec 07, 10:30
must - have to
must - has to
#3Authorcd_ (337571) 06 Dec 07, 10:36
and how about:

I should not have - I shouldn't've

and all the extensions possible

I couldn't've

I daren't - I dare not
#4Authorodondon irl06 Dec 07, 10:38
Bacon is right - never ever use such abbreviations in written English (unless it is a personal letter).
#5AuthorMike06 Dec 07, 10:46
@ Fabian: slightly OT
You should've written "cannot" instead of "can not"/"Can not" :)
#6Authorlaalaa (238508) 06 Dec 07, 10:47
@Bacon + Mike: I rather think that Fabian has just listed the words, and that in fact the correction runs from I'm to I am, and not the other way round...
#7Authorodondon irl06 Dec 07, 10:50
Gelten auch die poetischen (silbensparenden) Abkürzungen?

over -> o'er
ever -> e'er
never -> ne'er
#8AuthorDaddy06 Dec 07, 10:52
#9AuthorPachulke (286250) 06 Dec 07, 11:14
And, of course, the past tense for personal pronouns already listed, e.g. "he'd", we'd" (he would, we would)
#10AuthorLilly06 Dec 07, 11:15
cannot -> can't -> can not

need not -> needn't
#11AuthorAndres06 Dec 07, 11:33
In #8, I forgot:

even -> e'en . . .
#12AuthorDaddy06 Dec 07, 11:36
Diese sind wohl nicht zu gebrauchen, weil nicht eindeutig:

How'd - how would or how had or how did
Why'd - why would or why did or had
Where'd - where would or did or had
Who'd - who would or who had

When'd - when would, when had (recht ungebräuchlich wie mir scheint)

Und dann gib't das ganze noch mit 'll:
Why'll (recht selten geschrieben)

#13Authortommytom (382890) 06 Dec 07, 11:48
i Only registered users are allowed to post in this forum
LEO uses cookies in order to facilitate the fastest possible website experience with the most functions. In some cases cookies from third parties are also used. For further information about this subject please refer to the information under  Leo’s Terms of use / Data protection (Cookies)