Talk:Swiss Standard German

message: The normal spoken language in the German-speaking part of Switzerland are the local dialects. Swiss Standard German is only spoken in very few specific situations, for instance in schools and universities (though during the breaks, the professors will speak dialect with their students); in news broadcast of the public broadcast services; in the parliaments of certain German-speaking kantons; in the national parliament (unless another official language of Switzerland is used); in loudspeaker announcements in public places such as railway stations etc. The situations when Swiss Standard German is spoken are characteristically formal and public, and they are situations where written communication is also important.
In informal situations, Swiss Standard German is only used with people who don't understand the dialects. Among each other, the German speaking Swiss use their respective Swiss German dialects, irrespective of social class, education or topic.
Unlike in other regions where High German varieties are spoken, there is no continuum between Swiss Standard German and the Swiss German dialects. The speakers speak either Swiss Standard German or Swiss German dialect, and they are conscious about this choice.
: ...in news broadcast of the public broadcast services;..., but not in the weather forecast which immediatly follows the news. The weather forecast is given in Swiss German, sometimes by a weather person whose dialect is so thick that it is not understandable by a listener who is not a dialect speaker. More often than not, the forecasters are farily understandable. The men, especially older men, are more difficult to understand than the women, must be a macho man thing.
:... in loudspeaker announcements in public places such as railway stations etc. Not always, many times the announcements are given in SG, especially on the VBZ (Zürich public transport network). I've had to ask bystandards for translation into Standard German many times. Understandlby, those are stressful situations for the announcers, many times in emergency situations such as accidents or power failures. --TGC55 (talk) 15:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoken Swiss Standard German

message: The Swiss Keyboard (sg for swiss german, sf for swiss french) does not provide the capitalized Umlauts (ÄÖÜ), but the letters can be quite easily created by using CAPS LOCK before pressing the key.
Example sg-keyboard:
- using "ü" = "ü"
- using "ü" while CAPS LOCK is ON = "Ü"
- using "ü" together with shift = "è"
The problem is not the todays computer world, but the typewriter time. On a typewriter, one could not create ÄÖÜ.
--Jackobli (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or using ¨ (compose key) then U = Ü TiffaF (talk) 07:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written Swiss Standard German / Umlaut 

message: Swiss Standard German and Swiss German are strongly affected by the French language. I thnk that's something that should be mentioned. 92.105.88.38 (talk) 00:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's true, though I think this is rather not a case of a special development towards French in Switzerland, but rather a special development away from French outside Switzerland. Many of the French loans that are still used in Switzerland were used in Germany as well but got replaced by German words a century ago, for instance words such as Perron, Trottoir, Billet, Kondukteur, Parterre or Velo(ziped) that are still used in Switzerland but were replaced in Germany by Bahnsteig, Bürgersteig, Fahrkarte, Schaffner, Erdgeschoss and Fahrrad. -- machᵗᵃˡᵏ 08:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  French influence 

message: Will you please stop that pointless edit war about Michael Kühntopf: Schweiz-Lexikon. Sach- und Sprachlexikon zur Schweiz? Or explain the reasons. I see that the article on the book's author was deleted after a rather lengthy discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kühntopf. Of course, that has no consequences whatsoever for the significance of his book in this article. The author of a source is certainly not required to have a Wikipedia entry. Please explain. -- mach 🙈🙉🙊 06:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael Kühntopf: ''Schweiz-Lexikon. Sach- und Sprachlexikon zur Schweiz.'' 

message: Would the linguistic experts here please take a look at the recent change in that article.  Thank you.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Bernese Mountain Dog]]

message: Can someone add a note to the intro about whether or not the German-speakers of Belgium, Germany, Austria etc. can understand Swiss Standard German?
I suspect the answer is a very clear yes, but I'm not an authority.
Every region uses slightly different words, so there are words used in Hamburg that are unheard of in Berlin, but it would be an exaggeration to say that this causes problems for communication. Gronky (talk) 11:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are certainly confusing Swiss Standard German – which is as similar to German Standard German as, say, General American is to Received Pronunciation (quite similar indeed) – with Swiss German – which is as similar to modern New High German as, say, Scots is to English. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 21:15, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can others understand it without problems? 

message: @User:Kwamikagami: Please provide sources for your claim that Swiss Standard German has no native speakers. Otherwise, that claim is WP:OR and must be removed from Wikipedia. Please note that WP:OTHERSTUFF does not count as a source in any way.
And please stop edit-warring over such a silly question. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 19:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: @User:Kwamikagami: Please do not ever delete my talk contributions. If you want to keep the discussions in one place, you can add a link to that place. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 19:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

text: Indeed, deleting other's comments is a violation of WP:TALKO. -- ZH8000 (talk) 19:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And copy-pasting a discussion on four talk pages is disruptive.  — kwami (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: He has answered in Talk:Austrian German#Are there any sources for the (rather preposterous) claim that Austrian German has no native speakers?. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 19:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Which one of you made the rather preposterous claim, anyway?  I was following your lead, assuming you knew what you were talking about.  — kwami (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly never said or wrote anywhere that Standard German or any variety thereof has no native speakers, and I have not seen anybody else making that claim. You were the one who put that information into the articles (though you have withdrewn it now). I am sorry if you misinterpreted my utterances in that way. BTW, I thought you wanted to keep the discussion in one place. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 19:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it was one of the other editors involved is this dispute.  As I said, I'm not going to bother reviewing the page histories to see who it was, as it hardly matters.  I put the info in the box after being reverted with this claim in the edit summary.  — kwami (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are there any sources for the (rather preposterous) claim that Swiss Standard German has no native speakers? 

message: Regarding this edit, we should have a definition for this unusual term, wouldn't you agree? I copied the text from the target page. Is there a better one? Otherwise, we should just omit it as being too specialized (or perhaps "wrong") for a general-interest encyclopedia. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 01:30, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't omit technical terms. Anybody who does not understand them can simply click on them. It is normal that some technical terms are not readily understandable to laypeople, just look at *any* article in mathematics or physics. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 05:15, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Without overdoing the inclusion of technical terms, I agree that we shouldn't omit unusual or technical terms entirely, but I also think it is often a good idea to provide a brief definition or explanatory phrase. It helps the average Wikipedia reader comprehend an otherwise difficult or challenging article. I think this is a good example of a term that should have a brief definition or explanatory phrase. It's a key term, and if a reader doesn't understand what it is, he or she will have trouble understanding the points made right after it. However, BeenAroundAWhile, in this case I think the explanatory phrase you added is not much clearer than the original term, so not very helpful. If you can think of a simpler, clearer definition (perhaps not using the word "codified"), it might work. mach, you might find WP:TECHNICAL interesting.  – Corinne (talk) 05:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pluricentric language 

message: According to this article, the following are distinct:
# German Standard German (Hochdeutsch)
# Swiss Standard German, a.k.a. Swiss High German (Schweizerhochdeutsch)
# Swiss German, a.k.a. Swiss Alemannic dialects (Schweizerdeutsch)
However, the tables in the Swiss Standard German#Written Swiss Standard German section of this article have columns labeled Swiss and Standard German.  I can't figure out how these labels correspond to the items above.  Presumably "Swiss" means either #2 or #3, and "Standard German" means either #1 or #2. 
Could someone clarify this?  01:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables need clarification 

message: So one good thing to add is that in Standard German the "ig" is pronounced "ich"
Like “König” is Pronounced "Könich" or "Honig" Is Pronounced "Honich"
While in Swiss Standard German it's pronounced like it's written, that's why it is also sometimes called written German. MaxTheVin (talk) 13:07, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronounciation in Swiss Standard German