touching an animal in this way is called patting. i don't know of any standard patting phrases. perhaps something like:

Here, like this.

then,

You try.

This is how I would translate this phrase in this situation. Also, it's "petting" not "patting" when it comes to an animal. You "pat" someone on the back and "pet" your "pet".

Ich glaube hier war die Frage, ob eine passende kindersprachliches Synonym für das Wort streicheln gibt.

Der Knackpunkt hier ist, dass "ei, ei" oder "mach ei" auf einem sehr niedrigen sprachlichen Niveu ist. "Ei" wird nur von Kindern bzw. in Gesprächen mit Kindern verwendet, sofern diese noch nicht passende Begriffe wie "streicheln" etc kennen. (~Kindersprache)

Ähnlich wäre zB wenn man von einem "Wau-wau" spricht und einen Hund meint oä. Ich glaube hier war die Frage, ob eine passende kindersprachliches Synonym für das Wort streicheln gibt.

das mit dem Ei hab ich noch nie gehört, ist das weit verbreitet? Ich finde sowas sollte man Kindern nicht unbedingt beibringen.

Hast du den Spruch noch nie gehört? "Jackeline, mach die Mäh ma' ei!" Ist, glaube ich, von Herbert Knebel... *kicher*

der comedian oder kabarattist meinte es als rätsel und fragte nach der bedeutung von "mach ma dat mäh ei" (streichel mal das schaf).

ein englisches wort in kindersprache dafür kenne ich leider nicht...

@justinehresman

I too would say 'pat' when describing stroking an animal. Perhaps it's a BE/AE thing.

... that is making out, touching each other etc...
Patting is 'ei machen'. Don't think it has anything to do with AE/BE

Ich würde eher fragen, was das Kind sagt. Es handelt sich dabei ja in der Regel um sehr kleine Kinder, die dann beim streicheln hingebungsvoll 'ei' sagen. Streicheln englische Kinder stumm?

I can't think of a phrase in English to encourage a young child to stroke an animal, but would probably simply say Aaaah while demonstrating the action!

Re petting/patting: patting for me (BE) is tapping an animal, for example, on its head by moving the hand up and down. Petting is stroking. A Streichelwiese is normally called a petting zoo or petting farm, depending on where it is, in BE.

Die sagen aber auch nur "ei", weil irgendwelche Erwachsenen ihnen "Mach mal 'ei'" gesagt haben. Mir hat das als Kind bestimmt niemand gesagt (dieses "ei machen" habe ich erst mit bestimmt 20+ bewußt irgendwo wahrgenommen und fand es albern), und auch meine Neffen streicheln Tiere entweder stumm oder sie lachen vor Freude oder (versuchen zu) sagen, dass das ja ganz weich und flauschig ist.

"Ei machen" ist für mich die gleiche Kategorie wie "Heia machen" oder "Guck mal, ein Wauwau". Man kann dem Kind auch direkt das richtige Wort sagen.

Mach' fein Aj bei dem WauWau.

...Randbemerkung.

Nee, wenn ich das höre, klingt es schon wie das, was Hühner legen ;o)

@Dragon: Kann man sicherlich. Aber dieses "ei ei" würde ich als Bestandteil der "child directed speech" sehen, der man ja schon eine bestimmte Funktion zuschreibt...

Wen es interessiert, siehe z.B. hier:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_talk

Also, für mich ist das langsam gesprochene Ei ein Laut mit dem man das Kind etwas bremst. Kleine Kinder streicheln oft hektisch, hauen dann mal ein bisschen oder ziehen an den Haaren, einfach um zu testen, was so geht. Das "Ei" gerade im Umgang mit Tieren heißt dann: mach langsam, mach vorsichtig und leise, eben nicht laut lachen und quietschen, weil Tiere da nicht drauf stehen - die meisten.
Deshalb würde für mich gently passen.
Es hat nichts mit einer "Übersetzung" für streicheln zu tun, sondern wenn dann eher für vorsichtig oder zärtlich.

Als Engländerin mit Kindern in Deutschland merkte ich, wie "Mach Ei/Ay" sehr gebräuchlich ist (bei Kontaktaufnahme mit anderen Kindern, Menschen, Tieren - aus GB kenne ich das überhaupt nicht. Es muss ein bisschen wie die Kreislaufbeschwerden sein ;-)(landesbedingt, meinte ich)

Also ich kenne "Ei machen" auch als Baby-Sprache für streicheln. Ich erinnere mich insbesondere an solche Stilblüten wie "Mach mal ei bei der Katze, nicht au!" Als Aufforderung, das Mieze-Tier nicht so stürmisch zu kosen :D

Totally agree with Spike on what patting and petting mean. To pat an animal is to pat it, end of. Just like you'd pat a friend on the back. Of course you can pat a dog, and dogs often quite like it. But that's not petting, that's patting.

To pet means to stroke etc.

Are you sure you guys aren't just confused by the fact that a German native will pronounce both words identically?

Spike, would you say "Give the cat a pet" or "I'm petting my dog"? I've seen petting zoos in the UK but would still use "stroke" and not "pet" as a verb - has "to pet" caught on in the UK now?

@21:
I'd generally use "stroke" when talking to a kid (i.e. not pet)
I'd say pat if I really mean "pat" the dog

btw, you don't "give an animal a pet", you "pet it" (it's a noun, not a verb; the noun = domesticated animal kept for pleasure). So you'd say "pet the dog", not "give XYZ a pet".

#22 You can't ever give a cat a pet in AE? In BE I'd give a cat a stroke, even though giving my mum a stroke would involve my divorcing and coming home to live with her :-) - but I guess that the two meanings of "stroke" are far enough apart for them not to be confused.

natuerlich klingt "mach mal ei" daemlich, und natuerlich verstehen viele Kinder auch richtige Woerter, aber trotzdem gibt es Kinder (vielleicht nicht gerade die, die die Sprachbegabung von ihren Uebersetzereltern geerbt haben, und welche hier vielleicht ueberrepresentiert sind), die reagieren auf lautmalerisches, gern auch mit Silbenwiederholung, besser, als auf "Nein, piek dem Hund nicht in die Augen, sondern streichel ihn lieber vorsichtig, wenn Du ihn schon anfassen musst"- und in besagter Situation geht es auch ein buesschen darum, die Botschaft zu vermitteln, bevor der Hund zubeisst...
Bei einem meiner Kinder wirkte interessanterweise jedenfalls neinnein deutlich besser als nein, und da war es mir auch egal, ob das doof klingt.
Und positive, umlenkende Aeusserungen (mach mal ei) kommen auch schneller an, als bremsende, negative (mit "nicht so doll" koennen manche bis zum Kindergarten nichts mit anfangen)

@22, I don't follow your first question.

"To give X a pet" means to give X a bunny wabbit or a cat or whatever to keep as a pet.

Also note that I'd never pat a cat, even if I'd pet it. Cat's don't like being patted, but they do like being petted or stroked. I'd pat a dog or a horse though.

#24 In English we don't have a baby language version of "careful" but "careful" usually did the trick, if accompanied by the parent leaping up with a look of horror :-)
I like a bit of baby language, though, as how long do you get the chance to use it?

#25 In BE we say "Give the cat a stroke" as an alternative to "Stroke the cat", and are not worried about the fact that "to give so. a stroke" can also mean to give them such a shock that they have a stroke (the medical stroke). That's why I thought that maybe in AE you could say "Give the cat a pet" as an alternative to "Pet the cat". I'm familiar with "petting zoos" in BE but am not familiar with how to use "pet" as a verb. When I last lived in the UK it was an American usage.

I'd be surprised if you can say "give a dog a pet in AE" - I'm a Brit btw. Not all verbs have a corresponding noun.

Pet is a transitive verb; you pet something/someone. It's just like streicheln or stroke as a verb. Die Katze streicheln - to pet/stroke the cat. I don't think this is a BE/AE thing at all. I can assure you that the verb to pet is perfectly common in BE and is never going to be interpreted as being "an American thing".

#28 I'm a Brit too and would say that the verb "to stroke" was the most common form used when I last lived in the UK. I accept that things are different today, and was just hoping someone could clear me up on modern use. I see the OALD still marks "to pet" as mainly American, but that seems to be the only dictionary to do so.

(Hm, I see an American commenting on a Brit's preference of "stroke" just back in June, so maybe I'm not entirely out of date? http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.co... )

@25: My cats (three of them) love it when we pet them, but they DO also love being pat like a dog or horse as well - so never generalise ;-)

So nebenbei, ich (Österreicherin) bin mit "ei ei" aufgewachsen und finde da auch nichts dabei. "Mach ei" hab ich persönlich nie gehört, aber warum denn nicht.
Ich hielte die Übersetzung mit "easy" für gut geeignet.. Klingt ähnlich, und drückt wohl auch etwa das selbe aus.

I don't think I've ever seen a question in LEO that has aroused as much discussion as this one.
For me (a Brit) "pat" means to repeatedly strike the animal gently with the flat of the hand (not necessarily on the head). "To give it a pat" is usual.
"Pet" means "stroke", perhaps with the nuance of spoiling the animal with overattention. "To pet" is normal. You can't give a dog/cat a pet, as the dog/cat itself is a pet!
As regards "mach ei": I think I vaguely remember my parents saying things like "aw" and "eigh" (pronounced something like "ääää".

#28 reminds me of another thread in which someone claimed that you couldn't "give someone a cuddle", only "cuddle someone". What's your take on that, x? (Both "give the cat a stroke" and "give me a cuddle" sound fine to me.)


I found this on the subject in A New Approach to English Grammar, On Semantic Principles by R.M.W. Dixon (p. 61) and thought it was interesting (I hope it's OK to quote such a long excerpt):

"2.9.7. HAVE A VERB, GIVE A VERB and TAKE A VERB

As an alternative to John ran (in the park before breakfast) we can say John had a run (in the park before breakfast), with a slight difference in meaning. Have replaces an intransitive verb and this verb, preceded by the indefinite article a, becomes head of the NP that follows have. However, parallel to John arrived (from town before breakfast) it is not permissible to say *John had an arrive (from town before breakfast). Some verbs can occur in HAVE A VERB constructions, but others, with similar meanings, cannot. Why can we say have a cry but not *have a die; have a yawn but not *have a breathe; have a sit-down but not *have a settle down; have a think but not *have a reflect?

Similar to HAVE-A-plus-intransitive-VERB is GIVE-A-plus-transitive-VERB. John kicked the door could be rephrased, with a slight meaning different, as John gave the door a kick. But it is not possible to say, alongside John broke the door, the sentence *John gave the door a break. [...]

HAVE A constructions occur primarily with intransitive and GIVE A constructions primarily with transitive verbs, but there are exceptions. [...] Stroke is transitive; one can give the cat a stroke or have a stroke of the fur coat."

If you gave an American cat a stroke, that could be the last of its nine lives. Better not to have a stroke yourself either, paralysis is a drag.

Pat by moving the hand up and down, usually on top of the head. Sometimes done by babies who can't yet pet by moving the hand sideways.

Pat the Bunny - touchable baby book

Careful, don't hurt the kitty, just pet it - parent to toddler

Is it okay if she touches the baby? - parent of toddler to parent of baby

You can give someone a cuddle, why on earth not? :)

How often do people say "give me a hug" or "give me a cuddle"?

"Give the cat a stroke" is also fine (at least in BE). It's only "give a pet" that doesn't work (because pet as a noun has a completely different meaning, and does not mean a stroke).

#34 The "logical" explanation for why "give sth a pet" is no good would be fine if "give sth. a stroke" was also impossible due to "stroke" having another, also feasible meaning :-)

Ah, OK, in that case, I misunderstood your comment "Pet is a transitive verb; you pet something/someone. It's just like streicheln or stroke as a verb.". Ignore me.

And "give the cow a pat" should also be impossible, right? :-)

#21: I would normally use stroke as a verb rather than pet but, if using the word pet, I would use it as a verb rather than ...give the dog a pet.

@CM2DD

I'm not sure whether you've understood this or not. "Pet" as a noun does not mean "a stroke". It only means a domesticated animal kept for pleasure. It therefore cannot/will not/should not be used as you did, neither would "to give someone a pet" ever be misunderstood to mean anything but to give them an animal as a pet. That's not me saying that. That's the dictionary. That's why you can't say it. Because it doesn't have the meaning you thought it might.

"Stroke" on the other hand has several meanings. Stroke as a verb is unambiguous. Stroke as a noun is ambiguous - it can have a medical meaning; it can mean to gently caress with your hands. So yes, you can make a joke about giving a cat a stroke and using up one if it's nine lives. But not with "pet".

Some things have more than one meaning (e.g. a stroke, right) and some things don't. There's nothing logical about it, it's just the way things are.

#39 I understand your explanations perfectly: you simply didn't get my point. I was explaining why I thought "give so. a pet" could theoretically be possible before you said it isn't. I wasn't trying to disagree with you on usage.
 
You said that "pet" as a noun doesn't work "because it has a completely different meaning, and does not mean a stroke". The word "because" in your sentence made it sound like you thought "pet" having a different meaning explains why you can't say "give it a pet". I gave some examples to show that many words have different meanings as nouns, but they can still be used in the "give sth a noun" format. So in theory there is no logical reason why "give sth a pet" is impossible, even if it doesn't exist in practice. Sorry if this idea is complicated, and sorry I attempted the discussion in the first place.