additional text #4 ( for S.B. & K.Z.) Preuß Übersetzung E-D Oberstufe: Klausur SS 2009
Please, translate the boxed-in passage into idiomatic German:
This heading can be read both in the straightforward sense of “rules
about humour” and in the graffiti sense of “humour rules, OK!” The
latter is in fact more appropriate, as the most noticeable and important
“rule” about humour in English conversation is its dominance and
pervasiveness. Humour rules. Humour governs. Humour is omnipresent and
omnipotent.
There is an awful
lot of guff talked about the English Sense of Humour, including many patriotic
attempts to prove that our sense of humour is somehow unique and superior to
everyone else’s. Many English people seem to believe that we have some sort
of global monopoly, if not on humour itself, then at least on certain
“brands” of humour — the high-class ones such as wit and especially
irony. My findings indicate that while there may indeed be something
distinctive about English humour, the real “defining characteristic” is
the value we put on humour, the central importance of humour in English
culture and social interactions.
In English conversation, there is always an undercurrent of humour. We
can barely manage to say “hello” or comment on the weather without somehow
contriving to make a bit of a joke out of it, and most English conversations
will involve at least some degree of banter, teasing, irony, understatement,
humorous self-deprecation, mockery or just silliness. Humour is our “default
mode”, if you like: we do not have to switch it on deliberately, and we
cannot switch it off. For the English, the rules of humour are the cultural
equivalent of natural laws - we obey them automatically, rather in the way
that we obey the law of gravity.
At the most basic
level, an underlying rule in all English conversation is the proscription of
“earnestness”. Although we may not have a monopoly on humour, or even on
irony, the English are probably more acutely sensitive than any other nation
to the distinction between “serious” and “solemn”, between
“sincerity” and “earnestness”.
(324 words)
This distinction is crucial to any kind of understanding of Englishness.
I cannot emphasize this strongly enough: if you are not able to grasp these
subtle but vital differences, you will never understand the English — and even
if you speak the language fluently, you will never feel or appear entirely at
home in conversation with the English. Your English may be impeccable, but your
behavioural “grammar” will be full of glaring errors.
Once you have become sufficiently sensitized to these distinctions, the
Importance of Not Being Earnest rule is really quite simple. Seriousness is
acceptable, solemnity is prohibited. Sincerity is allowed, earnestness is
strictly forbidden. Pomposity and self-importance are outlawed. Serious matters
can be spoken of seriously, but one must never take oneself too seriously.
The ability to laugh at ourselves, although it may be rooted in a form of
arrogance, is one of the more endearing characteristics of the English […]
Quelle:
Kate Fox, Watching the English, The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour,
London 2004, pp. 61 – 62
A
longer passage follows below:
Humour
Rules
The
heading can be read both in the straightforward sense of 'rules about humour'
and in the graffiti sense of 'humour rules, OK!'*) The latter is in fact more appropriate, as the most
noticeable and important 'rule' about humour in English conversation is its
dominance and pervasiveness. Humour rules. Humour governs. Humour is omnipresent
and omnipotent. I wasn't even going to do a separate chapter on humour, because
I knew that, like class, it permeates every aspect of English life and culture,
and would therefore just naturally crop up in different contexts throughout the
book. It did, but the trouble with English humour is that it is so pervasive
that to convey its role in our lives I would have to mention it in every other
paragraph, which would eventually become tedious - so it got its own chapter
after all.
There
is an awful lot of guff talked about the English Sense of Humour, including many
patriotic attempts to prove that our sense of humour is somehow unique and
superior to everyone else's. Many English people seem to believe that we have
some sort of global monopoly, if not on humour itself, then at least on certain
'brands' of humour - the high-class ones such as wit and especially irony. My
findings indicate that while there may indeed be something distinctive about
English humour, the real 'defining characteristic' is the value we put on
humour, the central importance of humour in English culture and social
interactions.
In
other cultures, there is 'a time and a place' for humour; it is a special,
separate kind of talk. In English conversation, there is always an undercurrent
of humour. We can barely manage to say 'hello' or comment on the weather without
somehow contriving to make a bit of a joke out of it, and most English
conversations will involve at least some degree of banter, teasing, irony,
understatement, humorous self-deprecation, mockery or just silliness. Humour is
our 'default mode', if you like: we do not have to switch it on deliberately,
and we cannot switch it off. For the English, the rules of humour are the
cultural equivalent of natural laws — we obey them automatically, rather in
the way that we obey the law of gravity.
At
the most basic level, an underlying rule in all English conversation is the
proscription of 'earnestness'. Although we may not have a monopoly on humour, or
even on irony, the English are probably more acutely sensitive than any other
nation to the distinction between 'serious' and 'solemn', between 'sincerity'
and 'earnestness'.
This
distinction is crucial to any kind of understanding of Englishness. I cannot
emphasize this strongly enough: if you are not able to grasp these subtle but
vital differences, you will never understand the English — and even if you
speak the language fluently, you will never feel or appear entirely at home in
conversation with the English. Your English may be impeccable, but your
behavioural 'grammar' will be full of glaring errors.
Once
you have become sufficiently sensitized to these distinctions, the Importance of
Not Being Earnest rule is really quite simple. Seriousness is acceptable,
solemnity is prohibited. Sincerity is allowed, earnestness is strictly forbidden.
Pomposity and self-importance are outlawed. Serious matters can be spoken of
seriously, but one must never take oneself too seriously. The ability to
laugh at ourselves, although it may be rooted in a form of arrogance, is one of
the more endearing characteristics of the English. (At least, I hope I am right
about this: if I have overestimated our ability to laugh at ourselves, this book
will be rather unpopular.)
To take a deliberately extreme example, the kind of
hand-on-heart, gushing earnestness and pompous, Bible-thumping solemnity
favoured by almost all American politicians would never win a single vote in
this country — we watch these speeches on our news programmes with a kind of
smugly detached amusement, wondering how the cheering crowds can possibly be so
credulous as to fall for this sort of nonsense. When we are not feeling smugly
amused, we are cringing with vicarious embarrassment: how can these politicians
bring themselves to utter such shamefully earnest platitudes, in such
ludicrously solemn tones? We expect politicians to speak largely in platitudes,
of course — ours are no different in this respect — it is the earnestness
that makes us wince. The same goes for the gushy, tearful acceptance speeches of
American actors at the Oscars and other awards ceremonies, to which English
television viewers across the country all respond with the same
finger-down-throat 'I'm going to be sick' gesture. You will rarely see English
Oscar-winners indulging in these heart-on-sleeve displays — their speeches
tend to be either short and dignified or self-deprecatingly humorous, and even
so they nearly always manage to look uncomfortable and embarrassed. Any English
thespian who dares to break these unwritten rules is ridiculed and dismissed as
a 'luvvie'.
And
Americans, although among the easiest to scoff at, are by no means the only
targets of our cynical censure. The sentimental patriotism of leaders and the
portentous earnestness of writers, artists, actors, musicians, pundits and other
public figures of all nations are treated with equal derision and disdain by the
English, who can spot the slightest hint of self-importance at twenty paces,
even on a grainy television picture and in a language we don't understand.
LINKS:
a) Amazon: www.amazon.co.uk/Watching-English-Hidden-Rules-Behaviour/dp/0340818867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275724684&sr=1-1
b)
A few reviews:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/jul/24/highereducation.news1
http://www.sirc.org/news/watching_the_english.shtml
http://www.thememorybank.co.uk/2006/05/11/kate-foxs-watching-the-english/
http://www.york.ac.uk/ipup/projects/britishness/discussion/fox.html
http://www.popularscience.co.uk/reviews/rev367.htm
http://stuck-in-a-book.blogspot.com/2007/04/50-books_30.html
http://www.abebooks.com/Watching-English-Kate-Fox/1150964006/bd
*) “x rules, OK”:
http://ask.metafilter.com/25979/AskMe-Rules-OK
*) “Chelsea rules, OK!”
http://www.google.de/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_deDE310DE310&q=Chelsea+rules%2c+OK%21
back
to exam
translation SS 2010, index
back to homepage
THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE THE BOTTOM LINE