The death of Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz

Law change kills 63-letter longest German word

The 63-letter word easily beats the 48-letter Donau- Dampfschifffahrtsgesellschaftskapitänswitwe (Danube steamship company captain’s widow) which many German students learn at school.

But now Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz, which revelled in the abbreviation RkReÜAÜG, is no more. It was introduced by the Mecklenburg Western-Pomeranian state government in 1999 to organize testing of beef for mad cow disease, or BSE.

Yet because the European Union recommendation for BSE tests on healthy cows is now being dropped, the need for the six-paragraph law has also gone. It will be replaced by a new law with the equally tongue-twisting – and fascinating – Landesverordnung über die Zuständigkeiten für die Überwachung der Rind-und Kalbfleischetikettierung (state edict on the responsibilities for the monitoring of beef and veal labelling).

For me, this state edict would have been a Land Order, and Zuständigkeiten might have been competence.

German Wikipedia has an entry on this too.

I obviously didn’t read Sprachlog closely enough on threatened words:

PS: Die BILD-Zeitung listet “die zehn längsten deutschen Wörter” (Link können Sie derzeit vermutlich noch googeln):

Grundstücksverkehrsgenehmigungszuständigkeitsübertragungsverordnung
Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz
Verkehrsinfrastrukturfinanzierungsgesellschaft
Gleichgewichtsdichtegradientenzentrifugation
Elektrizitätswirtschaftsorganisationsgesetz
Verkehrswegeplanungsbeschleunigungsgesetz
Hochleistungsflüssigkeitschromatographie
Restriktionsfragmentlängenpolymorphismus
Telekommunikationsüberwachungsverordnung
Unternehmenssteuerfortentwicklungsgesetz

Diese sollen “in mindestens vier Texten belegt” sein. Ja, die meisten vermutlich hier, hier, hier und hier.

Thanks to Trevor for the wake-up.

LATER NOTE: new post in Sprachlog, with links to many non-German publications that have reported on the story.

Translations of statutes may not help you in China

English Translations Of Chinese Laws. Don’t Call Us.

An article on China Law Blog reminds us that however problematic English translations of German statutes may be, you could be worse off in China.

China’s laws are too precise/too vague/too changing/too real world/too dependent on regulations to use English language translations of one or two laws for making final decisions. An English language translation can in many cases give you a good “feel” for a situation or a starting point for how to proceed, but the risk of that translation being very wrong or just enough wrong to make a big (or even just a little difference) is just too great for you to rely on it without more.

The Independent should be ashamed of itself/Ich bin ein Berliner

I’ve discussed this before here (2008) but it refuses to die the death. People just love believing funny stories. Today The Independent exhumed it again:

Errors and omissions: How a wrong translation became the great Berlin bake-off

Except that he didn’t. Giles Cooper writes in from north London to confirm what an old friend with a degree in German told me long ago. Kennedy, or his speech writer, got it wrong. “Ich bin ein Berliner” means “I am a doughnut” (that is, a particular kind of German doughnut known as a Berliner). The German for “I am a Berliner” (meaning a person from Berlin) has no indefinite article. Kennedy should have said, “Ich bin Berliner.” But everybody is familiar with the words he actually said – so for headline purposes “Ich bin ein Berliner” has become correct.

No, it is not good enough to quote ‘Giles Cooper’ (who is he?) or ‘an old friend with a degree in German’, (on the lines of What do they call a person who passed his medical exams by 1 per cent: ‘Dr’).

Fortunately Peter Harvey has done a good dissection – and he isn’t even in Germany! It’s that myth again

It is always possible for someone else with a better knowledge of German to know otherwise, or for anyone at all to check the facts on the internet. Sadly, that is not the worst we get from the Independent. In a nod to truth and research the article concludes:

It is only fair to add that Wikipedia, in its most solemn American fact-checking mode, dismisses what it calls the “jelly doughnut misconception”, maintaining that what Kennedy said was correct all along. But why spoil a good story?

Yes indeed. If you’re a British journalist, why should you allow ‘solemn fact-checking’ to spoil a good story?