Talk:Denglisch

message: Shouldn't this page be at "Denglisch"? Maximus Rex 17:15, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemma

message: Years ago, when I was working in Germany, one of the natives there confided in me that his wife once made a lasting impression saying this in a fast-food restaurant in Florida. (Of course, it was his wife, & not him. ;-) And during the same time one native made the same mistake practicing his English over this false friend; his English was otherwise far better than my German. I came to conclude this is a common mistake amongst Germans who haven't practiced their English sufficiently.
A minor point -- although it annoyed me after a while -- was the confusion of "Bye-bye" for "Tschuess/Tschau", which caused the speaker to sound as if she/he were speaking to a very young child (IMHO, a better equivalent would be the American English "Later", or the British "Cheers"). But then slang/colloquialisms are the hardest parts of a language to acquire; even some native speakers never quite get it right. -- llywrch 17:16, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone I know recently translated the German word "Unternehmer" in a very literal way... this was obviously not a proper use of Denglish and succeeded in raising some eyebrows. --Cs32en (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The reason for the often made mistake with "become" is; the german word "bekommen" sounds very similar and means "get" or "receive" and many non-really-english-speaker-germans think its the same. It happens often when they try to impressive english speaker or to cover that they aren`t really able to speak english ;)--84.161.85.95 (talk) 19:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is not really related to Denglish but rather belong to the "Lübke English" class of translational mistakes. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 05:36, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "I become a hamburger" 

message: I think I'm almost fluent in Germish and I probably used all of the examples but "Body Bag" at least once in my lifetime. If someone told me about a "body bag", I'd assume he/she was looking for something to carry a (dead) body. It's literal translation to German IMHO could be "Leichensack". Neither Leichensack nor Body Bag has anything in common with German Rucksack. I don't think this example should be used in the article.
BTW: As Backpacking is now a widely understood Germish word, ppl from Germany will probably use the term "backpack" more often in future. Thus Germish helps speaking better English in that case.
--JanKorger 19:50, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Bodybag" in German refers to those backpacks with only one strap who've been fashionable for a while, e.g. http://www.neckermann.de/shop/bodybag-36.asp. The point is that this is a word coined in Germany and is unknown in the English speaking world in that meaning, akin to "dressman", "talkmaster", "evergreen" etc. The added hilariousness comes from the fact that this word exists in English anyway, but has a completely different meaning there, which most Germans are unaware of. Imagine native English speaking tourists in passing a supermarket in Germany plastered with ads for "BODYBAGS only EUR 15.99". 213.73.114.95 21:09, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hilarious! These small "rucksacks" are called "bum bags" in the UK and "fanny packs" in the US. Leibniz 20:14, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Imho the "body bag" thing started with an italian manufacturer selling their sleeping bags to Austria and, later, Germany with the intention to establish international brands "body bag" and "cosy body bag" for them. They stopped the campaign, when they learned about the already existing use of the expression. Afaics that was in the 1990s or earlier. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 05:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Body Bag 

message: This article is wandering between "English influences to the German language" vs. "Improper English spoken by German natives".  IMO, they are two different kinds of animals, the former is German and latter is English.  The introduction at the top seems to define the former, but later in the article, the latter is mixed in.  Looks like Germish is not in the same catagory as Engrish or Chinglish which are bad English spoken by Japanese and Chinese respectively.  Kowloonese 19:31, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
:could we reach an agreement by stating that while some english influences to german are harmless or even useful (as in tech speak), most owe their existence to a ruinous tendency towards hype? that border is fuzzy and floating. hype of today can make it into the Duden tomorrow. -- Kku 11:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While Spanglish and Denglish are bad Spanish and Germen respectively, Engrish and Chinglish are bad English.  Is there a similar term for bad English due to the influence of Germen?  Kowloonese 00:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ambiguous article structure and article title 

message: "Denglish" and its various siblings apparently comprise non-idiomatic errors produced by primary language contamination which native speakers find amusing. As much base humor, it has a victim, but since it's all in "fun" (now a good German word), that aspect is readily passed over. Why, for instance, is there no companion article holding English and American students of German up to ridicule for similar errors? Since that is the case, isn't it rather pointless to attempt a transformation of this article into a serious observation of the interaction between German and English?  Janko 13:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the funny thing in this is, of course, that prophecy must of necessity take the gender, in German, which Prophezeiung has, and that's feminine. (There's no other way. In German we have die Tour "journey" for the sake of "Reise", even though the French say la Tour Eiffel but le Tour de France.) As to other things, the "self-fulfilling prophecy" seems to have been a scientific theory of late, expounded upon in English, so that there is only the chance of either rendering it in Anglicism or in the Quasi-Anglicism selbsterfüllende Prophezeiung. Anyway, if @Janko thinks this article is about mocking Germans who try to speak English, that only proves he isn't German. (As I assume him to do; if he doesn't, it proves I'm not English.) The ones who mock at Denglisch the very most are Germans. (In any case, the sound and healthy German habit of mocking Germans is only, of late, interrupted by times of being sorry for German misdeeds. Which is why Germans take so extraordinary pleasure in watching To Be or Not To Be, which they themselves had been unsafe in conscience to produce.) But we are talking about a couple of loanwords - Computer (though "Rechner", calculator, is practised to an extent), Hardware, Software are only for a convenience and custom's sake not spelt Kompjuter, Hartwär, Softwär. The mockery is against a jargon evolved in high economical positions, especially the finance sector; and the pure error in Public Relations, or Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, which assumes it is easier to make people forget that Bahnhofshallen are Bahnhofshallen (and, instead, "Lounges"), rather than make them believe they might with time and time become beautiful Bahnhofshallen. --93.133.198.77 (talk) 22:19, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doomed from the Start 

message: I can across this article about a town that wants to ban Denglish . Is this town (Mühlhausen) or their actions noteworthy enough for inclusion in this article? BlankVerse 11:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The town heads probably just wanted some press attention.  Though in principle this sounds very löblich.  Maybe with the right connections, they can get some help from Winzigweich Konzern?  I'm thinking about something like the automatic correction feature in Wort für Fenster. Aragorn2 21:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banning Denglish? 

message: I can't see what's wrong (or strange) about these two examples. The 'already' seems a little out of place, but that's it.
— mæstro t/c, 09:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Germanisation of English words'

message: Is any of the terms "Engleutsch, Genglish, Germish, Germanglish, or Ginglish" common in English? If so, they should be reintroduced, as I removed them, because they are not common in German for sure. -- 790 12:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  other terms 

message: Infos
This article is hilarious. :) 
But as a native speaker of German, I can't see that the word "Infos" is any kind of anglizism. The German word "Information" is simply abbreviated to "Info" (singular) and the plural form of this is, in a correct use of German grammar rules, "Infos". Other opinions? esmi 11:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, that's a new addition, which I have now removed; it's not pseudo-English at all. Nor is "no name" - which is overused and sometimes oddly used in German, but is not all that different from its English usage. I chopped it out as well.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 12:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: esmi that´s correct, I think someone is getting mixed up with the fact that "over-zealous" Germans when speaking English, tend to speak of "Informations" and "Standing-Ovations" both of which DO NOT have a plural form in English. Regarding "no-name", that was my addition. The reason I added it, is that it is often used in German, e.g. especially on TV reports about previously unknown sportsmen/women. It seems quite OK to use it in German, but in English it would considered "rude" or "bad-mannered" to call someone a "no-name", daher, the different meaning!. If prohibit has lost his onions over it, it´s OK to delete it. :o) IsarSteve 13:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S.ProhibitOnions I realise you are involved with Onions, but you don´t have to CHOP out entries, cutting them would also be OK (siehe: I chopped it out as well) LOL IsarSteve 13:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh-heh. "Infos" is perfectly fine German, but a common German mistake when speaking English, but is therefore not Denglisch (although other Denglisch words often end up in a German-speaker's English vocabulary because they think they are English. But common German mistakes in English don't belong in this article.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 18:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Pseudo-anglicisms in German 

message: Am transferring some of the supposed pseudo-anglicisms over here as they appear to be simple anglicisms, with no significant modification. Tacitus 23:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are still a lot of words which are not pseudo-anglicisms but merely anglicisms. "Center" is just a different (American) spelling of "centre", "chillen" is the English slang term "to chill (out)", "city" has its original meaning, "dissen" is "to diss" with German flexion, same with "downloaden", "einloggen", "joggen".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.157.169.74 (talk) 16:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

text: "Manager" in German usually means executives (higher level), "managen" means what those people (supposedly) do: supervise with leadership, lots; typical de:"Manager" would be CEO or Member of the Board of Large Foobuzz AG -- it's a well known bogus friend (to manage can also mean zurechtkommen) --145.253.2.232 (talk) 17:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  All the abovementioned are true pseudoanglicisms, or mixes of German and English in one word. For exmple Backshop, Recyclingpapier are put together from "Back-" (German) and "shop" (English), or "recycling" (English) and "Papier" (German). As you can see, e.g. the corret English "recycled paper" is not used as a loanword, but a new word is created from an English word and a German word rolled into one. That is Denglish. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 06:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Although an old conversation, both PubliusTacitus and Purodha are correct. And this has continued to be a problem since they wrote.  Today, I removed about 3/4 of the entries in a table in the #Pseudo-anglicisms section, for essentially the same reason, as they already outlined above. Beyond that, the whole article is a tissue of Original research and needs to be sourced (although it hasn't been in years) or cut back significantly, to respect Wikipedia's core principle of Verifiability. Mathglot (talk) 01:07, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Pruning the Pseudo-anglicisms

message: I suggest the section headed "Translations" ought to be removed from the article. Interesting as it may be to see how Babelfish translates equivalent sections of the German- and English-language Wikipedias (only equivalent, it should be noted -- the originals do not say precisely the same things), the section is really an illustration of the quality of machine translation in general rather than of the phenomenon of "Denglisch" in particular, and therefore does not, in my view, properly belong here. -- Picapica 15:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations 

message: See the section of the fuck page about German. I think that "fuck" deserves some kind of mention on this page; "fuck" is used as an exclamation with increasing frequency, and I (rarely) hear "fucking" as an adjective. I'm wary of putting in a see also to fuck, as it would be particularly vague,  but am not sure how to integrate it into the page itself. Ideas? samwaltz 00:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The (German) Former Mrs Larrington used to shake her head sadly whenever she heard her countrymen use “fucking!” as an exclamation.  This, she assured me, was a common error. Mr Larrington (talk) 12:47, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Fuck

message: often used in youth slang. for example in Movies or Computer Games "Kille den Endboss" "Kill the endboss"
:This is by no means either slang or youth language. It is an anglicism of the older kind, and was used decades ago; it is mostly applied for contract murders. However, usage in Computer Games seems to lack accuracy. In the military, it is always "Vernichte" die feindlichen Kräfte etc. (destroy the enemy forces) that is used. Or this, the "kill the endboss", might be for being cool, as a "killer" (which is also a German word). While I think, for description, the words "Auftrag ausgeführt" have (in German) a greater force than an untranslated "mission accomplished". However, in many of these cases it could be lack of knowledge about what the real translation is. --93.133.198.77 (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Killen" 

message: May I contribute to this discussion with some further examples? Then please allow me to continue in German ;-)
Die deutsche (internationale?) Parfümerie-Kette Douglas, nach eigener Aussage eine "Lifestyle-Gruppe", bietet auf ihrer deutschen Homepage im Internet (nur Neonazis verwenden das Wort "Heimseite" oder "Weltnetz", was eine Verwendung durch den wohlmeinenden Deutschsprachler ausschließt) unter anderem folgende "Links" (Querverweise) an: "Hair", "Make-Up", "Nice Price", "Tipps & Trends", "Fashion", "Top Ten", "Newsletter".
Bis vor kurzem verwendete Douglas in seinen Fernseh"spots" den "Slogan": "Come in and find out". Dieser wurde später geändert in "Douglas macht das Leben schöner" – nicht, weil Bewahrer der deutschen Sprache protestiert hätten, sondern, weil Konsumforscher herausgefunden hatten, dass die Mehrzahl der mit diesem Spruch konfrontierten Menschen ihn wie folgt übersetzten: "Kommen Sie herein und finden Sie heraus" ("Come in and find your way out").--91.10.102.151 19:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Come in and find out" 

message: I have heard some younger German speakers say things like: "Sie hat so rumgebitcht." Does it mean the same thing as 'to bitch' in English? What are the appropriate uses of this word? I'm not entirely sure, but I get the impression that the uses of this verb differ slightly from its English cognate.Seamus padraig 12:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It could've meant that she complained excessively or that the acted either as a bitch OR sluttly.  Though personally I assume that the speaker in question had no idea *what* he or she wanted to describe anyway. But perhaps she meant "zicken", which drives from "Zicke" (she-goat), which is roughly equivalent to "bitch (noun)", though withouth any sexual undertones. --Peterbruells 09:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rumbitchen" 

message: I'm about to start in on a major cut to this article that will in phases remove most of the content.  Almost everything here is not up to WP standards.  Please do not readd content that cannot be sourced.  Please note that simply collecting phrases used in advertising is original research. Scott.wheeler (talk) 10:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since my first edit was already reverted, I'm going to throw this one over to the RfC folks. Scott.wheeler (talk) 12:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with your WP:OR concerns.  This page is full of things that people added because they know about it, or use the words themselves.  There are no documented third party sources for the vast majority of this material, especially the list, which may also violate WP:NOT.  "Give it some time" isn't really a valid rationale for keeping the material, since it still hasn't been sourced.  The thing is, I think a good article can be written about this.  It would have most examples trimmed, and have a lot of sources, including ones about social reactions to it, like here:  although I'm not sure if that meets WP:RS. --TexasDex ★ 20:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworking, needs major cuts 

message: Ever since I started that article back in 2003/4, it seems to have undergone a twofold change: one towards more moderate language, but also towards rather simplistic ideas and moderation to the point of blandness. why was Kurt Tucholsky thrown out? What has become of the machine translation part? What seemed wrong about the very famous German example "I become a Hamburger"? Who needs so many examples on primitive teenage "germish" where one would have sufficed easily? And, above all, why has the English in some places deteriorated markedly? I do not deem my own perfect. Far from it. But i really wonder how a phrase like "... much English..." is allowed to survive. Or was this meant to be a witty self-reference? All in all i am not really convinced that time and democratic liberty have had a beneficiary effect on this lemma. -- Kku (talk) 18:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  mass intelligence at work. a counterexample? 

message: For the "in 2002" etc. part: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,545997,00.html 
Don't know if this counts as a reliable source? I'm still not common with the Wiki codes, so - if it's fine with you, maybe someone else might want to add it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.225.52.34 (talk) 09:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There you go. I added the reference. De728631 (talk) 23:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Citation needed" 

message: Never heard "gedownloadet" in Germany, and "in [year]" has probably not originated from the English equivalent. --Cs32en (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Both are very common,up to my knowledge.
And no other language (except for Turkish-lol) is so widespread in Germany.
"In 2005" is English,but comletely uncorrect German.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.137.193 (talk) 10:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

text: If you've never heard "gedownloadet", I wonder where you live and what you talk about.  If you discuss your computer in German, you are bound to hear it within five minutes.  And of course e. g. "gutes Wetter in 2005" is an influx of English into German.  Maikel (talk) 14:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a matter of dispute whether it is gedownloadet or downgeloadet. If down- is interpreted as a prefix and treated like a German prefix, it should be the latter; and I think Duden or somewho did in fact decide this way.--93.133.198.77 (talk) 22:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "gedownloadet", "in 2005" 

message: I always thought that the only difference between those two was that one was BE the other AE, so I'm a little confused to find them in the list of pseudo-anglicisms. Is there also a difference in meaning? And even if there is, can it be a "pseudo-anglicism" just because Germans use the American spelling with the British meaning of the word? Six words (talk) 08:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed it from the list of pseudo-anglicisms.--Six words (talk) 22:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  difference between "Centre" and "Center" 

message: Quote: also ... Pary Englisch or VISisch/VIS English
Since I could find no external verification for these three synonyms (all relevant Google hits pointed back to this article), and since I have never heard them before, and since they make no sense, I have removed them. Maikel (talk) 14:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Synonyms

message: Quote: Another phenomenon is the anglicised use of the apostrophe. It is often used in the English way (which in standard German is wrong) for the genitive: Müller's Mühle instead of Müllers Mühle
AFIK this is outdated, the Genitivapostroph is permissible under the Neue Rechtschreibung since 1997. Maikel (talk) 14:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And still looks ugly. When I last looked into the New Spelling regularies - no metaphor, I did really look in them, it's quite a time ago and it was the pre-2005 variant - this was allowable only for Andrea's car ("to make more clear the basic form of the name") but apparently it is still only Müllers Mühle. I personally go for the organic Spelling in which our books are printed, not the activist Spelling which was only done for the sake that something has to change after all, and by just replacing daß with dass did nothing, if not even to a slight degree worsen, to the only real difficulty held against the old spelling, viz. the daß - das distinction. But even there the confusion with the name Andreas is not really there in writing about Andreas Auto: Andreasses are normally not surnamed Auto; if Andreas takes its own genitive, it needs at least its own apostrophe (Andreas' Auto), but I'd prefer either the genitive Andreassens which is only outdated to the simple apostrophe which never really has been in use, andor one of the vast possibilities of circumlocution as in das Auto vom Andreas.--93.133.198.77 (talk) 22:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The distinction is simple enough. If the owner is named Andrea, we speak of Andreas Auto. If the owner is named Andreas, we write (not speak btw) Andreas' Auto. No confusion possible. 93.134.232.148 (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deppenapostroph 

message: Could someone please archive this discussions page -- thanks. Maikel (talk) 14:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: I would like to point out that the German Beamer does not mean any kind of projector - a slide projector or cinematograph will never be called a Beamer in German. The word Beamer only applies to video and data projectors - in other words, projectors that receive their picture signal electronically and are connected to computers or video playback devices. --84.157.20.89 (talk) 11:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beamer 

message: Is it absolutely necessary to link to the nationalist Deutschtum.net?!? 188.101.89.48 (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to nationalist page 

message: I just wanted to point to a pretty common, yet cruel example of Denglish: Backshop which may be translated as Bakery or Bäckerei, depending on which language you use. I'm not sure if, and where this example might join the article. 92.225.73.120 (talk) 08:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note, thought, that this is a pun, because the first part of the compound is still German, while the second part is a common loanword from English. The pun is, of course, intentioned. — N-true (talk) 19:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Backshop as it is being used today, if translated to either "Bäckerei" or "bakery" is loosing information. I's a very special bakery, or no bakery at all. "Backshop" is being used for a sales point of bakery products baked elsewhere, which can be found in the entrances of supermarkets, furniture stores, or gas stations. So, it is a store, or shop, but not a bakery in these instances. Also, a baking automat, or a shop hosting several of those, is called a "Backshop" (at least that's what's printed on them). The specialty in these cases is that the sell items freshly from te automats. Dough is bough in ready made portions on trays, so part of the work traditionally done in a bakery is also not being done in those kinds of "Backshop"s. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 08:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Might be good to add this usage to the article at backshop.
-and that concept is, and has for moreover a decade been known in Denmark as " bake-off ", which to an american means something completely other and to British absolutely nothing.I found that it would make it a perfect example of " danglish " ( the danish counterpart to denglish ), untill I recently discovered that the term occurs in an EC regulation that explains and describes the process.So,an english term, probably cooked up by ingenious officials, with none or a totally differing meaning to natural born english speakers, but now part of the common european legislation from which it´s bound to eventually spread backwards into the english vocabulary. Brusselish ? Englopean ? Flight714 (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backshop 

message: Where's the big difference? Above all both note on equal phenomenons liek Deppenapostroph. Couldn't they be united into one point? MichaelXXLF (talk) 14:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Twisting of grammar rules" vs. "Influence on grammar" 

message: Aren’t these borrowed from French instead of directly from English? They do seem to carry the same meanings of the corresponding French words.—Gniw (Wing) (talk) 02:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  parking and slip 

message: Denglish or whatever you call it fascinates me. handy is probably the most interesting example, because Germans use it thinking it is an adopted English word for a cellular phone, when it isn't ever used as a noun in English. Denglish appears everywhere in advertisements in Germany, sometimes making sense but often not. When a word or phrase is adopted from English, and then used in a way that makes no sense in English or is just not the appropriate phrase or word to use, is it incorrect English or incorrect German, or correct something-else? What gets really confusing is when, in conversation, Germans switch back and forth from German to Denglish and back to German. I'd prefer they would speak one language or another. I have heard conversations between people who are fluent in both English and German switch languages in the middle of a sentence, and the conversation seems to flow nonetheless, whereas I, listening to them, feel nauseous and dizzy. I guess it could suit them well if they don't wish to be overheard. The point I am trying to get to is: we need to differentiate between words and phrases borrowed from English and placed into spoken German, and the abrupt switching into English and back into German. Where to draw the line is a job for an expert linguist. I suspect that the proper way of defining a borrowed word is to modify it by plural or tense by German rules and see if it makes sense in common usage.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.24.67 (talk) 17:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  From the point of view of an American visiting Germany 

message: I think it is noteworthy for the Denglish in Advertising section that Germans on average understand considerably less english/denglish in advertising than once thought. But I'm lazy and don't feel like editing linking the sources properly at this time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.197.129.106 (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germans frequently misunderstand English in Advertising 

message: This is difficult. Your best bet is to find a reliable source that explicitly describes a word as "pseudo-anglicism". 
For example, "fitness" or "training" are clearly loanwords. They were taken from existing English usage and just became German words; since they were loaned from one specific meaning of the English term, their semantics as loanwords developed to be different from the source language, but that's normal for loanwords.
Then there are actual pseudo-anglicisms, which are just made up at some point by people (mostly in marketing?) with limited grasp of English; body bag is the most hilarious example of this, and handy probably the best-known case by now. 
I would dispute that the German noun "Fitness" is a pseudo-anglicisim. It is simply a loan, taken from the context as in fitness center and came to be used freely. 
But the line is difficult to draw. How about the verb trampen? Clearly from to tramp "walk, wander", but perhaps via tramp (n.) "vagabond". Is this a pseudo-anglicism or a loan? The only way is to cite the opinion of relevant secondary sources. 
The Duden links provided in the list do not establish the terms  as pseudo-anglicisms. They just establish the existence of the German word (e.g. (trampen "hitchhiking"). 
Now, "to tramp" does not mean "to hitchhike" in English, and a German speaker might mistakenly assume it does. This is a situation of false friends, but not necessarily of "pseudo-anglicism". In this case, the semantic proximity remains intact as in W. H. Davies, a Welsh poet and tramp, who hitchhiked America during the early 20th century. This is different from handy or beamer, where Germans would take random English words and apply them to some appliance. The case of body bag is even more complicated. These are two English loanwords, both body and bag came to be used independently in German, body in the context of "Fitness", and bag in the sense of "an accessoire which is too fashionable to be merely described as Tasche". The people who came up with Body Bag simply combined two existing real anglicisms, and it was just their bad luck that the compound already existed in English. I would be willing to accept this as "pseudo-anglicism" because it is funny, but technically it is really just a German compound of two actual anglicisms. 
Perhaps it would make sense to distinguish several classes of pseudo-anglicisms
*actual, simple, irreducible pseudo-anglicisms: beamer, handy, slip
*formation of new compounds from loaned components, "Body Bag", also "Public Viewing", "Showmaster", "Streetworker"
*"City" for "downtown, city center". From The City, i.e. generalisation of an actual English expression
*"Oldtimer", "Evergreen": existing English expressions which received a specific (restricted) meaning in German. Also Drive-in, come on, this is a valid English expression, the Germans just use it to also cover what would technically be a "drive-thru". Not a pseudo-anglicism, just semantic widening.
*English compounds which lost one element (essential for context) in the loan. "City [center]"? "Smoking"?
*"Happy End" for "happy ending"; "Ice Tea" for "iced tea": these are examples of anglicisms which introduced poor grammar. Perhaps also "[photo] shooting", "peeling".
--dab (𒁳) 09:57, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Difference between loanword and pseudo-anglicism

message: This put a wry grin in my face. Whilst you English speakers probably have no idea why companies use Color Waschmittel instead, Germans (like me too) will instantly understand why the German term you suggested in the article is a bit, say, controversial. As soon as you omit the s, just for fun, it would be "Waschmittel für Farbige" and get its sense turned upside down: "Washing detergent for colored people"!! Hence, I think that "Denglisch" on the detergent bottles may sometimes also be due to possible controversies with similar sounding words. "Farbiger", "Farbige" was still used in Germany in the 1980s (without anyone feeling offended about it, go figure) for people we'd call African Americans (German: "Afroamerikaner(innen)") at present. -andy 77.191.195.135 (talk) 13:34, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd disagree with that. There is the perfectly usable and utterly non-racist word "Buntwaschmittel", which is more elegant than "Waschmittel für Farbiges" anyway. At least in the usage I am familiar with, the laundry type in question is called "Buntwäsche", not "farbige Wäsche" in any case. Also, just as a note because I'm a pedantic German, the outdated "Farbiger" as a reference to a person means "black", not "African American". After all, it can refer to black Germans or black people living in Germany or black people living in any other place who have no connection to the US whatsoever. I've seen US-Americans reflexively refer to either of those groups as "African Americans" before, but it is of course not actually appropriate if the people in question aren't Americans. 87.153.54.153 (talk) 18:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Waschmittel für Farbiges" :))) 

message: How about adding (some of) the following external links?
* German Grammar sites:
** http://deppenleerzeichen.de/ - mostly examples of "Deppenleerzeichen"
** http://idiotenapostroph.org/ - explaining German rules for using apostrophes
* Dictionaries Denglish-German:
** https://de.wikibooks.org/wiki/Fruchtbringendes_W%C3%B6rterbuch
** http://www.anti-denglisch.org/index.php
** http://www.vds-ev.de/index
** http://netzwerk.free.fr/deutschomat/
** http://www.aktionlebendigesdeutsch.de/wortarchiv.php
** http://www.sprachpflege.info:81/index.php/W%C3%B6rterbuch
** http://www.wiesagichsaufdeutsch.de/index.php?title=Spezial:Allpages
* Dictionaries English-German & German-English:
** http://www.dict.cc/
** http://dict.leo.org/ende/index_de.html
** http://de.pons.com/%C3%BCbersetzung/englisch-deutsch
-Quark8967 (talk) 22:51, 19 June 2014 & 18:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The actual Denglish-German dictionaries might be appropriate, but the normal dictionaly and the grammer sites are unnecessary here. Alandeus (talk) 08:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Substituted at 13:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: I've seen "Denglisch" used (often by its writer, self-deprecatingly) to describe "broken English" (e.g., homonym mistakes, spelling mistakes like sh→sch, German word substitution like with→mit). This sense, apparently (from the talk) once part of the article, seems to be totally missing now. Is the word being mis-used (if that's possible) where I've seen it, and maybe described in another article now? If so, shouldn't there be a hatnote in this article mentioning it? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another meaning 

message: Pu 91.5.239.70 (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Viewing