Please review the contents that you create or copy from the public domain

I would like to ask all the sharers to double check what their contents. I find it outrageous when I read, for my own pleasure, a text with over 26 errors from a text (450 words) somebody copy-past from the Gutenburg projet. I really appreciate all the people who take some of their times to share content for the benefit of all of us but quality should not be put aside for quantity.

I am sure it probably all unintentional errors but just take another minutes to double-check.

By the way, I have editing rights in the English section so it OK now.

I largely agree with you. I find it very annoying if people add hundreds of librivox/Gutenberg books and don’t take the time to check if the text is appropriate and fit the audio.

I guess that they don’t check the text and that they don’t study these lessons. So the errors are not unintentional. I guess they simply don’t mind.

I hesitate uploading German librivox books. One of the reasons is that the spelling of old books is quite different from today’s spelling. We had several spelling reforms in the past.

I’ve editing rights too but I think it is not my job to correct lessons for the lazy providers. I use the editing rights to correct single mistakes that can happen to each of us. But I don’t work on the librivox lessons.

Quality before quantity, how right, you are Grunts67.

Like Vera, I am happy to correct the odd mistake, but baulk at bulk corrections. Providers, please take care!

May I have editing rights in the English section as well? I am a native speaker. If someone has a question/is unsure about a sentence, I could check it.

@IT - Sure thing, I’ve now given you editor access for English.

Thank-you very much! Please let me know if you’d like me to review any texts.

I found one with several errors read by a non-native speaker repeating the errors in the text. I suspect that this text was “borrowed” from a children’s book of the same name. However, I don’t want to accuse the member publicly. How can substandard texts (not mere errors) be removed without embarrassing anyone here?

This post was edited.

If you click “Rate it!” at the bottom, there’s a box you can tick to report poor quality lessons. Thanks for your help with this!

Thanks, Alex. I found the box.

Hi friends! I’m one of the providers who share some fiction texts from Librivox for English and especially for German library. I was dissatisfied for example that we didn’t almost have the works of German literature though it is one of the richest literatures in the world.
It is our old discussion with Vera wether we need or needn’t fiction literature for language studying. Her opinion: we needn’t; but my strong opinion: we need!.. Of course, in order to go to the restaurant ot to ask the way in the foreign town we can manage without fiction literature, it’s enough to have a passing knowledge of the language. But for a real familiarity with the language we can’t do without some god examples of fiction literature in this language and especially classical literature because this literature is the best expression of the culture of the nation.
Yes, some words could be old fasioned, some spelling rules must be changed, buit the heart and the passions of the nation would be open for you, and it’s of great and best value for language study!
Now some technical questions: to share lessons takes a lot of time, at least for me. I read und listened 50 German poems to select only 10; the same with fairy tales by Grimms - I refused a lot of very interesting fairy tales because I disliked the voice of announsers. It was a great work of selection!.. But of course I didn’t correct some old words or old spelling because they reproduce the aroma of that time, the mistery of fiction literature, the magic of the culture. We didn’t improve Shakespear, why have I to improve the words of brothers Grimm?!.. And to unterstad for example that old ‘thun’ is modern ‘tun’ - we needn’t to be for it the man of great intellect!

@Evgueny, if you read the first post this thread is about spelling. And my post is reffering to the spelling only. I don’t want to start a new discussion if old books are suitable for language learning.

Please consider in the case of the spelling: If you buy a new version of one of Goethe’s book in a shop the spelling is definitely modernized. It fits the rules of the newest spelling reform. This is how students and other Germans read classical literature. Do you think the spelling on the Gutenberg site is the same as Goethe has written it? No, we had several spelling reforms in the past centuries and in the time of Goethe and Schiller there were no “Standard German spelling” or something like this. The Gutenberg version IS NOT the original version and there is no reason to think it is better or closer to Goethes German. So if it is not the original version why shouldn’t we use the correct spelling? This makes it easier for the students. And this is how Germans deal with German classicals. The only exception are linguistic studies.

@Evgueny: “…And to unterstad for example that old ‘thun’ is modern ‘tun’ - we needn’t to be for it the man of great intellect!”

@Vera: “…why shouldn’t we use the correct spelling? This makes it easier for the students.”

I think you both have a very good point.

Vera is right that people should start by learning modern spelling first - clearly it would be confusing for beginners (or even people at intermediate level) to see words with different spellings.

However a foreign learner of German would have to be at a fairly advanced level in order to read Goethe. At this point, as Evgueny says, it surely isn’t such a big deal if “tun” becomes “thun” or “Überzeugung” becomes “Ueberzeugung”, etc?

(Obviously it would always be better to have a text with the modern spelling if this is available.)

And yet again, I want to agree, this time with Jay_B.

Modern is a must for beginners to, say, low intermediate.

Any texts with older spelling conventions etc at those levels OUGHT to have a health warning on them: careful dangerous spelling!

But from then on read what you think you can cope with, read whatever you are comfortable with! (Providers could still draw attention to the deviant nature of orthography for those sunny natures that aren’t aware of the passing of time and proper spelling in the first place?)

I love the challenge of German and English in old editions, still like to read correspondence in Sütterlin Schrift. Occasionally, just to punish myself, I used to read Walther v d Vogelweide. The follies of youth.

While I’m comfortable reading French - and quite like scurrilous verses - I would never attempt Francois Villon in the original, although I would love to have the two copies side by side.

And I remain firmly on the side of Vera, careless editing of imports is not a good thing to have on LingQ.

VeraI: “If you buy a new version of one of Goethe’s book in a shop the spelling is definitely modernized.”

I doubt that Goethe has been published in the “Neue Deutsche Rechtschreibung”. Even the works of Hermann Hesse from 1900…1940 are still published in the “alte Rechtschreibung”, exactly how Hesse wrote it.

Example - Siddhartha:

Siddhartha hatte begonnen, Unzufriedenheit in sich zu nähren, Er hatte
begonnen zu fühlen, daß die Liebe seines Vaters, und die Liebe seiner
Mutter, und auch die Liebe seines Freundes, Govindas, nicht immer und
für alle Zeit ihn beglücken, ihn stillen, ihn sättigen, ihm genügen
werde. Er hatte begonnen zu ahnen, daß sein ehrwürdiger Vater und
seine anderen Lehrer, daß die weisen Brahmanen ihm von ihrer Weisheit
das meiste und beste schon mitgeteilt, daß sie ihre Fülle schon in
sein wartendes Gefäß gegossen hätten, und das Gefäß war nicht voll,
der Geist war nicht begnügt, die Seele war nicht ruhig, das Herz nicht
gestillt.

You will not find any “dass”. They are all written as “daß” :wink:

If you buy classic literature, you’ll normally NOT get the currently used “Neue Deutsche Rechtschreibung”.

I myself try to avoid the “Neue Deutsche Rechtschreibung” like many others. I have learned “alte Rechtschreibung”, and I will use it (till I die).

Even the company Erfurt (they invented and produce “Raufaser” = Ingrain wallpaper) call their product “Rauhfaser” : http://www.erfurt.com/cms/products/diy/rauhfaserdiy.html
The DUDEN: Duden | Raufaser | Rechtschreibung, Bedeutung, Definition, Herkunft

Goethe war die Rechtschreibung übrigens immer ziemlich gleichgültig.

Zitat 1:
Mir, der ich selten selbst geschrieben, was ich zum Druck beförderte, und, weil ich diktierte, mich dazu verschiedener Hände bedienen mußte, war die konsequente Rechtschreibung immer ziemlich gleichgültig. Wie dieses oder jenes Wort geschrieben wird, darauf kommt es doch eigentlich nicht an; sondern darauf, daß die Leser verstehen, was man damit sagen wollte! Und das haben die lieben Deutschen bei mir doch manchmal getan. – Johann Wolfgang Goethe

Zitat 2:
Ich halte mir diese Art Postulate nach Möglichkeit einfach vom Halse und mache, genau besehen, immer noch genug Schnitzer. Was aber die Kommas betrifft, so beruhige ich mein Gewissen immer mit einem Satz des alten Wieland, der besagt, Religion und Interpunktion seien Privatsache. – Johann Wolfgang Goethe

@Hape: re. Goethe-Zitat: “…und, weil ich diktierte, mich dazu verschiedener Hände bedienen mußte, war die konsequente Rechtschreibung immer ziemlich gleichgültig.”

That’s interesting - I didn’t know that Goethe sometimes dictated his work.

It always amuses me when scholars argue furiously over subtle textual differences in ancient texts (such as the Greek text of the New Testament.) In the Ancient world especially, very many “writers” did indeed often dictate to scribes - and not always the same one. The following point obviously doesn’t apply to Goethe, but before the advent of the printing press, texts were also handed down for posterity by being copied out by many generations of scribes - some of whom made small changes to spelling, grammar (and possibly even style.)

One assumes that Goethe’s scribes, on the other hand, were taking his work down verbatim!?


@SanneT: “…Modern is a must for beginners to, say, low intermediate … Any texts with older spelling conventions etc at those levels OUGHT to have a health warning on them: careful dangerous spelling! … But from then on read what you think you can cope with, read whatever you are comfortable with!”

Agreed.

Another thing worth mentioning: German spelling can vary quite a lot even between books, articles, etc printed within the last 15 or 20 years.

For example: I’m pretty sure I have seen: “so daß”, “sodass” and “so dass”… (I think the last one is prevailing at the moment!)

so daß / so dass / sodass

alte RS : “so daß”
neue RS: “sodass” oder “so dass”

Von Duden empfohlene Schreibung:
“sodass”

Thanks for the link, Hape.

BTW
I seem to remember hearing that one of the big daily newspapers in Germany is still using the old Rechtschreibung? Is this true?

Ich kommentiere so, dass es (nicht) immer Sinn ergibt.

@ Jay_B:

See Reform der deutschen Rechtschreibung von 1996 – Wikipedia

Once again, thanks for the very interesting link, Hape.

Anscheinend haben diese RS-Reformen ja eine ziemliche Unordnung verursacht!

Wenn ich das also richtig verstanden habe: man geht auf die Schule und lernt die offizielle neue Rechtschreibung von 2006. Dann geht man auf die Uni und liest Bücher, die teils mit der alten Rechtschreibung und teils mit der neuen RS von 2006 (bzw. der von 1996) verfasst und gedruckt worden sind. Zuletzt kriegt man aber eine tolle Stelle bei der Springer-Verlag, und arbeitet dann mit einer hauseigenen RS, die weder die neue noch die alte RS entspricht.

Kurz: jeder Mensch schreibt jetzt mehr oder weniger wie er will…

Die ganze Situation kommt mir chaotisch vor…irgendwie… (Und vor allen Dingen: very un-German!)