Advertising - LEO without ads? LEO Pur
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

 
  •  
  • Subject

    etw. im Köcher haben

    Sources
    Außerdem hat mich überrascht, wie viele angriffsorientierte Vereinsspieler diese Variante im Köcher haben.
    AuthorDanielle28 Jan 07, 11:18
    SuggestionQUIVER
    Sources
    I have something in the quiver
    #1AuthorLeila28 Jan 07, 11:22
    Comment
    What an ABSOLUTE load of b***sh*t, absolutely no such thing in English!

    Certainly goes to show you cannot believe everything you read on here.
    #2AuthorFrom the UK15 Oct 09, 09:37
    Suggestionat the ready
    Comment
    #2 take a chill pill!
    #3AuthorLegal Alien (479525) 15 Oct 09, 09:46
    Comment
    in their repertoire.
    #4AuthorRobuk15 Oct 09, 10:10
    Suggestionup the sleeve
    Comment
    könnte im richtigen Kontext auch passen.
    #5Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 15 Oct 09, 10:12
    Comment
    @5 - it's up their/my (etc) sleeve, not "the"
    #6AuthorBrit15 Oct 09, 11:49
    Comment
    in their arsenal

    Up their sleeve is sneaky.
    #7Authormabr (598108) 15 Oct 09, 19:22
    Comment
    up their sleeves, unless their all wearing the very same shirt. :-)
    #8Author dude (253248) 15 Oct 09, 19:58
    Comment
    ... die Metapher ist übrigens schief . . .

    Man hat mehrere 'Pfeile im Koecher'

    oder man hat 'noch etwas in der Hinterhand / in petto' . . .

    Letzere übersetzen sich beide zu:

    'to have sth. up one's sleeve = etw. in petto / in der Hinterhand haben' . . .
    #9AuthorDaddy . . . (533448) 15 Oct 09, 20:11
    Comment
    @9: Mehrere Pfeile im Köcher is, as you undoubtedly know, more strings to one's bow. You're right about the mixed metaphor.

    @8: Interesting point. Would all children who know the answer please raise their hand(s)? Would hands here signal two hands per kid, or one hand each per many kids? With the sleeve(s) I would find the expression unremarkable in either singular or plural. Logically you're right. Would that English were as logical as you are.
    #10Authormabr (598108) 15 Oct 09, 20:48
    Comment
    for what it's worth:

    sleeve - 1.3 million goggle hits
    sleeves - 2.7 million

    so it's basically 2:1 for the plural faction. :-)
    #11Author dude (253248) 15 Oct 09, 20:54
    Comment
    @ Dude: I think I'd say "they have something up their sleeve" - idiomatic

    "they have something up their sleeves" is of course logical but it's literal and the idiom's somehow gone '

    but maybe it's just my feeling
    #12Authormike15 Oct 09, 21:15
    Comment
    I suppose it's a personal preference, but I don't agree that the plural would make the idiom disappear somehow. Look at these fairly authoritative sources:

    http://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/09/garden/eati...
    EATING WELL; Some Pros With Low-Fat Dessert Tricks Up Their Sleeves

    http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-96892260.html
    Wheel 'n' deal: auto salespeople have lots of tricks up their sleeves to get you to pay more, but you can beat them at their own game.

    http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/sp...
    Eskimos have more tricks up their sleeves

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/rugby_...
    Leicester have more tricks up their sleeves
    #13Author dude (253248) 15 Oct 09, 21:23
    Comment
    ...like I said, maybe it's just me!
    #14Authormike15 Oct 09, 21:33
    Suggestionin their roster
    Comment
    'in their roster' wäre vielleicht noch eine passende Variante...
    #15AuthorPrometheus15 Oct 09, 22:11
    Comment
    support Mike - what Germans often forget and find highly illogical is that we often use "their" not just as a plural ("sie" equivalent) but to mean HE/SHE without specifying a gender - hence the possibility of the singular after "their"
    #16AuthorJ UK19 Oct 09, 12:58
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
 ­ automatisch zu ­ ­ umgewandelt