There is nothing wrong with examples.  For example check out the excellent "game theory" entry which is full of them.   
 The English for majorz is majoritarian.  Essentially it is brought about by having single member electoratal districts as in most parliaments of the Anglo world (except New Zealand which since 1996 has PR).  On the other hand, proportional representation (PR) is created by having multi-member electoral districts.  In majoritarian systems a minority vote can give a party the majority in the assembly.  (The name is dumb but we are stuck with it - the person who wears most of the blame is Dutch-American political scientist Arend Lijphart who is otherwise a model of clear thinking.)  In a PR system, the majority in parliament is formed from the parties (almost invariably more than one) which got a majority of votes.  The electorates have to have a minimum of 5 members for this to have a chance to be realised.  The (effective) number of members is referred to as the "magnitude" - ie in majoritarian the magnitude is 1; in a PR system it will be 5, 7, or more (an odd number is generally preferred for technical reasons).   

 Keimzelle is in error: in PR the voter chooses a party.  In majoritarian systems (eg the US, UK, Canada, Australia) you choose a person.  The effect is that a majoritarian MP represents people and a geographical area, whereas under PR the MP is representing an ideology or interest. - Pepper