Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
He means that "wenn" does not mean "when", it means "if" ("wann" means "when"). And I don't know why you persist in providing google translate answers to questions asking for translation. It's pointless, especially if – as in this case – perfectly good answers from actual people have already been given, and when the machine translation is actually wrong. You don't know German, so please leave this kind of question to those who do. --Viennese Waltz08:19, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree that google translate should not be used for these questions (in particular as OP is German himself and is more interested in the idiomatic expression in English rather than understanding what the German phrase means). However, it is not wrong in this case. The conjunction wenn can be translated as "if" or "when". I prefer "if" in this case on the assumption that it has not been decided yet whether the speaker will do whatever they're supposed to do. ("Wann" is the question word, "when?") --Wrongfilter (talk) 08:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's an overall good thing for other editors to be advised of constant problematic behaviour, like you, again with the Google translating. Not on the talk page, not on your user talk page, but here in public where everyone can see it. If you just stopped doing it, you would solve the problem yourself. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Showing people up does nothing except invite defensive behavior. That's why it was agreed, a long time ago, on the talk page, to not attack other users in front of the OP. Going to a given user's talk page is the polite thing to do, and is much less likely to result in defensiveness. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 14:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Advising another user of his problematic behaviour does not constitute an "attack". And I'd like to see a reference for your claim that raising issues on a user's talk page was agreed. When was anything ever agreed on the ref desk talk page lol. --Viennese Waltz15:39, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Besides Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis in linguistics, are there theories, models or hypotheses in linguistics and how do they impact on the brain? Also, what is the philosophical basis of linguistics and as well as what is the philosophical basis of each model, theory or hypothesis? Donmust90 (talk) 23:57, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Most working academic linguists really do not spend too much time concerned with Sapir-Whorf stuff. A more central concern of many is whether a "Poverty of the stimulus" available to children requires innateness of "Universal grammar" for successful first language acquisition to occur -- while the behaviorists of the 1950s thought that language acquisition happened through generalized stimulus-and-response conditioning, generalized pattern-matching, and other generalized learning strategies, without any real need to posit language-specific abilities of the human mind. (Of course, the behaviorists usually hated the word "mind" to start with, while their more recent competitors the cognitivists have a very different attitude...) -- AnonMoos (talk) 11:00, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
