Youtube video of Der billige Jakob
at the Michaeliskirchweih in Fürth.

His jokes are usually better. There’s another video of the Kirchweih where I can’t even understand the punchline.

Where a noun ends in s and needs a possessive s, I used to tell students they could write/say either Prince Charles’ ears or Prince Charles’s ears – some people think the latter sounds ugly.

At LegalTimes.com, Jonathan Starble comments on a Supreme Court case, Kansas v. Marsh.
Majority opinion (ThomaS, RobertS, Alito, Kennedy, Scalia): Kansas’ statute
Dissenting opinion (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg and StevenS): Kansas’s statute

Souter boldly began his Marsh dissent as follows: “Kansas’s capital sentencing statute provides . . .” This dramatic and gratuitous use of the possessive was an obvious attack on Thomas, who, as one of three s-ending members of the Court, is viewed as a role model for the millions of children who grow up with the stigma of grammatical ambiguity attached to their names.

What I don’t understand is why they didn’t just say the Kansas statute. But there is more:

Yet in other parts of the opinion, Scalia added only an apostrophe to form the words Stevens’, Adams’, and Tibbs’. Based on this, it would seem that he believes the extra s should be omitted if the existing s is preceded by a hard consonant sound.

Who actually does the final polishing to these decisions? I can’t believe the Bundesverfassungsgericht would allow such discrepancies through.

Finally, Starble concludes that the only proper form, at least in American English, is Kansas’s:

By a margin of 7-2, the strict anti-s view appears to be the clear preference of the land’s highest court. Yet experts on American usage overwhelmingly agree that Souter’s approach is the only one that is proper. As explained by Bryan Garner, author of A Dictionary of Modern American Usage, most authorities on the subject recognize only two types of singular nouns for which it is acceptable to omit the additional s: biblical or classical names, such as Jesus, Moses, or Aristophanes, and nouns formed from plurals, such as General Motors or Legal Times. (Journalists are often more liberal in excluding the additional s, but that is typically based on the pragmatic goal of conserving print space rather than on any ideological grounds.)

I really find that odd. I would avoid Kansas’s for euphony, unless it would be ambiguous. And on top of this, the issue is actually one of spoken English too: what did the justices actually say? And Starble does have a subheading ‘What about Arkansas?’ – since the last S in Arkansas is not pronounced, the problem doesn’t arise.

(Thanks to the Forensic Linguistics mailing list)

Seen at zeiser+büttner (does that mean there’s been an amalgamation with Zeiser + Ress? yes, apparently so) in Nuremberg:

A great Christmas present for the law student who has everything. Law students have to have the looseleaf Schönfelder, to take into exams. In this way they can also keep orthopaedic doctors in work in future years when they get problems with their shoulders. Outside Germany you could probably even use it as a handbag. Also works with Sartorius.

On an ITI list, a member was looking for this quotation on plain legal English:

One of the most colourful criticisms of legal language remains however that of Harman L.J. in Davy v. Leeds Corporation.14
“To reach a conclusion on this matter involved the court in wading through a monstrous legislative morass, staggering from stone to stone and ignoring the marsh gas exhaling from the forest of schedules lining the way on each side. I regarded it at one time, I must confess, as a slough of despond through which the court would never drag its feet, but I have, by leaping from tussock to tussock as best I might, eventually, pale and exhausted, reached the other side.” (at page 394)

The same search turned up an Irish Consultation Paper on statutory drafting and interpretation: plain language and the law.

This is interesting in that it shows how much less flexible Irish (and English) interpretation of statutes is than that in most other countries. It mentions the ‘teleological’ approach too.

Incidentally, the examples of active and passive confirm what I wrote yesterday: that in statutes it’s important to know the subject of a verb.

There is also the subsequent report on the same topic, which appeared later.

I’ve mentioned the complexities of German job references before. They have a sub-text. I suppose I would just translate fairly literally: zu unserer vollen Zufriedenheit would become to our complete satisfaction, which would give no clue that there is a more complimentary version, zu unserer vollsten Zufriedenheit.
Now e-fellows has an article (in German) on the problems of getting references for jobs in the USA, Canada or the UK (the three are, of course, lumped together).

In Deutschland lautet die Gesamtbewertung für ein sehr gutes Zeugnis immer: “Er/sie arbeitete stets zu unserer vollsten Zufriedenheit”. Zwar kann man diese Formel problemlos mit “He always worked to our fullest/utmost satisfaction” übersetzten. Allerdings werden im Englischen meist andere Beschreibungen bevorzugt (siehe unten). Grundsätzlich hat ein Arbeitszeugnis im Englischen eher den Charakter eines Empfehlungsschreibens.

The article continues with a recommendation to use a professional translator.

Wer nur ein deutsches Arbeitszeugnis bekommt, sollte stets beachten: Arbeitszeungisse immer professionell übersetzen lassen (Liste von Übersetzern siehe unten). Sonst könnte es passieren, das man so manchem “false friend” auf den Leim geht. Eine professionelle Übersetzung, das heißt eine Übesetzung von möglichst englischen Muttersprachlern mit guten Wirtschaftskenntnissen, kostet ab 100 Euro pro Zeugnis (siehe unten).

A professional translator is therefore one who avoids false friends – something rather hard for the client to tell. It’s pointed out that in an English reference, ‘His pleasant manner made him popular with the rest of the staff’ is intended as a compliment, whereas in a German reference it would be the opposite: I presume this is the kind of ‘false friend’ that is meant, although probably from the employee’s point of view, it would be more dangerous to translate into German than into English. The latter can at worst produce a reference that is too positive. Since the German employee has the right to a certain type of reference and has it in his or her possession, the door is open for obtaining wonderfully positive translations.

Here’s the e-fellows reference to professional translators:

Der Personalmanagement Service www.arbeitszeugnis.de/uebersetzung bietet Übersetzungen deutscher Arbeitszeugnisse von englischen Muttersprachlern an (Preis: ab 110 Euro).

They may well do a very good job, but what they offer is the conversion of a German Arbeitszeugnis into an English Letter of Reference / Recommendation. They will even let you fill out an application form and then create a letter of recommendation from nothing! This is translation to the power of ten:

# Übersetzung eines deutschen Arbeitszeugnisses in einen englischen Letter of Reference bzw. Letter of Recommendation (je nachdem, ob Sie Ihr Zeugnis für Ihre Unterlagen und zukünftigen Bewerbungen übersetzen lassen, oder sich zur Zeit auf eine konkrete Stelle bewerben und das Zeugnis somit an einen bestimmten Arbeitgeber richten, unterscheidet man zwischen einem Letter of Reference und einem Letter of Recommendation. Wir bieten beide Formen der Zeugnisübersetzung an): pauschal 110 € bei einem Umfang von max. 4000 Zeichen inkl. Leerzeichen, bei einem größeren Zeichenumfang werden pauschal 134 € berechnet)
# Neuerstellung eines englischen Letter of Reference bzw. Letter of Recommendation (ohne vorhandenes deutschsprachiges Zeugnis) auf Basis unseres Beurteilungsbogens für pauschal 160

€

This may well be excellent value for anyone applying for a job abroad. It also takes translation to new heights.

(Via Handakte WebLAWg)

Arnold Zwicky at Language Log has an entry on The passive in law.

This relates to the frequent call by Plain English advocates: ‘Avoid the passive’. Language Log has pilloried this before, and rightly so. Not every use of the passive in English is overuse, wimpy, wishy-washy or indirect. But what about the situation in legal English?

In Evidence class, the professor recently pointed out that in summation to the jury, “The evidence has not been disputed” is fine, but “The defendant did not dispute the evidence” is prohibited by the rules, because the defendant’s right to refuse to testify cannot be questioned.

This use of the passive has more to do with tactics than style. I presume it means you could say ‘The defendant’s lawyers did not dispute the evidence’, but that would sound a bit negative, as if one were to say ‘Maybe they should have done – maybe he had the wrong lawyers’.

The second point Zwicky makes is a plain English point:

Meanwhile, in Legal Writing classes, the professors insist on Avoid Passive for briefs and memos. Here I see the long influential arm of Bryan Garner, whose The Winning Brief: 100 Tips for Persuasive Briefing in Trial and Appellate Courts (2nd ed. 2004) and earlier books on legal writing come down hard on the passive voice (and restrictive relative which and sentence-initial linking however, among other things).

Whatever one thinks of Garner’s opinion on the English language, there’s more to lawyers and the passive than this.

One piece of advice for lawyers drafting contracts is: It’s better to write The landlord is to paint the exterior once every six years than The exterior is to be painted once every six years. Well-drafted contracts make it clear which party is to do what. Thus, for example, in The Elements of Legal Style, Garner writes that X shall give notice is better than Notice shall be given.

I’m not sure if the guys at Language Log Plaza have considered this real-world aspect. But maybe I’m over-sensitive because German contracts so very often use the passive and impersonal. What is the translator to do? I do not usually translate passives into actives in examples like these. But in other cases, I have to make a sentence active or personal for language reasons, and I have to be certain I use the right subject.

Blogwiese reports on an article in BLICK in late September: a Swiss politician wants Germans in Switzerland to be given integration courses. He is from the SVP, a Conservative party.

«An der Medizinischen Fakultät der Uni Zürich rumort es», sagt Mörgeli, der dort Professor für Medizingeschichte ist. Die Deutschen hätten Mühe, sich an unsere Gepflogenheit anzupassen. In der Schweiz seien die Hierarchien halt flacher. «Bei uns ist ein Arzt kein Gott in Weiss. In Deutschland schon.»

Blogwiese comments on the different style:

Das mit dem schrofferen Tonfall, das können wir gut nachvollziehen. Es ist der klassische Konflikt zwischen Deutscher „Ich kriege noch ein Pils!“ gegen „Wären Sie bitte so gut, ich hätte gern noch eine Stange, wenn möglich“. Deutsche Direktheit vs. Schweizer Schweizer Konjunktiv.

Actually I wish I had studied German manners many years ago. I think it is too late now. Self-deprecation, for example, can be seen as an invitation to be insulted.

In other news, a German BLICK reporter attends a course in Swiss German.

Incidentally, I learnt recently that a former British colleague of mine who is married to a German and has grown-up children here has now got dual nationality. This is theoretically possible in the EU if reciprocally permitted. And yet when she first enquired at the town hall in Erlangen, they accepted her application but laughed at her for imagining EU law filtered into Bavaria so fast.

Dirk Pässler lives and works in Fürth and takes nice photos. Photoblog.

The finished end (a bit grubby):

Work going on:

Here Jürgen’s antiques shop (plus Jürgen, who did not mind being photographed) with KW44 indicating the work should be finished in the 44th calendar week (around November 1st). A lot of shopkeepers painted these dates on Wednesday night in protest at how long it has taken.

Kreuzer’s with picture of sausage:

A travel agency:

And finally, the Buddel as done up by the grandmother of one of the builders:

Die Guardian berichtet, dass der Lord Chief Justice (Lordoberrichter) mit Strafgefangenen einen Tag lang gemeinnützige Arbeit geleistet hat, die statt einer Gefängnisstrafe verhängt wird oder eine Strafe verkürzt. Er wollte beweisen, dass auch Strafen, die keine Freiheitsstrafen sind (non-custodial sentences) funktionieren. Die Presse war nicht informiert.

‘My cover had been arranged,’ he said. ‘I posed as a shipping solicitor convicted of driving with excess alcohol and sentenced to 150 hours’ unpaid work and 18 months’ disqualification.’

Er musste u.a. eine heruntergekommene Unterführung saubermachen.

The most senior judge in England and Wales – told to wear a yellow fluorescent jacket for safety reasons – was driven to the Lakes in Bletchley, a run-down council estate where vandalism and antisocial behaviour are rife. He and his three workmates were ordered to scrape the moss from two filthy seating areas and clean them up before repainting a burnt-out underpass daubed in graffiti and clearing surrounding weeds.
Though the 68-year-old Phillips swims in icy outdoor pools all winter and treks in the Himalayas, he found the work demanding.

Vielleicht sollte man sich einfach vorstellen, man wäre in der Himalaya?

Some passers-by who saw the men’s ‘Community Payback’ sandwich board shouted at the Lord Chief Justice that his efforts were useless. ‘They asked why we were bothering to clean the place up when it would be just the same tomorrow.’ Others were encouraging, including a gang of small boys who demanded to know what crimes the men had committed. ‘Until then there hadn’t been a lot of chitchat or eye contact, but the offenders readily admitted what they had done,’ Phillips said. ‘I thought it was a very good lesson for these boys.’
He was allowed a short lunch break in which he ate a cheese and tomato roll prepared by his wife and read The Sea, by John Banville. His three workmates shared a copy of the Sun.

LATER NOTE: the Consilio Charon blog has the story, and a picture too (without the jacket, of course). (Thanks to Lorraine for that tip).