Jump to content
Norman

Helping Norman

Recommended Posts

Danke, Jonas! I've understand.
"Danke" is German. "Thanks" or "thank you" is probably what you're looking for. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There might not be anything measurable to gauge how you are doing with this, Jonas, but you'll know once you get casual with the language.
I think I'm doing quite fine, both orally and in written language. The norwegian language is a pretty good basis I think for learning English, as English is influenced by so many languages, latin, french, german and even Norwegian (viking era). I've also had 6 years of German in school, but I'm not as proficient in that as English. I listen to a lot of music, watch a lot of movies, and generally communicate a lot in English, and you know what they say about practice. :)
Whoops, I meant my words to be for Norman, apparently I myself and fluent in the language of absent mindedness. :) Anyway, if you're going to look at the dictionary, you might as well pair it up with a thesaurus, you'll learn many more words if you use the two in tandem. A good number of words in English have many other words that can just as well suffice, hence the need to have a book referencing them. This is a great way to expand vocabulary on specific words or topics that you want to have a lot of variation on. I've even got a friend who carries one on him, all the time, no joke.I don't know if other browsers have this, but Firefox's built in dictionary/spell check is wonderful as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, if you're going to look at the dictionary, you might as well pair it up with a thesaurus, you'll learn many more words if you use the two in tandem. A good number of words in English have many other words that can just as well suffice, hence the need to have a book referencing them.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abnormalSee where it reads "—Synonyms 1. anomalous, aberrant, irregular, deviant, unnatural, odd. See irregular." :)And there's also a thesaurus on the same domain, link under the search box.Interesting question: Is there another word for synonym? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I consider myself adept at learning things like that, and once you see how the structure of one works, you see a parallel to another. Conversely, if something totally new and unfamiliar occurs, then you get to see just how different one language is from another, which can be just as helpful.
If you are talking about programming, most present-day languages are in fact based off C (there are a few that aren't like it at all though, namely assembly). But try learning latin, I'm studying it right now and its nothing like I've ever seen before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are talking about programming, most present-day languages are in fact based off C (there are a few that aren't like it at all though, namely assembly). But try learning latin, I'm studying it right now and its nothing like I've ever seen before.
I've noted that the modern programming languages today most all have a basis of some C in their foundation. The syntax for C is similar C++, which is similar JavaScript, which is just similar Java, which similar to ActionScript, which is similar to PHP and on and on it goes, more than I intend to count. This has allowed me to pick up other programming languages at a decent speed.It's remarkable similar to Latin, in how it is a base some of today's languages. Spanish, Italian, French, English; again, the list goes on. I actually tried learning Latin online once, and I found it strikingly much like Spanish it structure and in some verbs. Learn a little bit of one, and the rest falls into place I guess.By the way, it's taken as the conventional saying that English is the hardest language to learn, can anyone vouch for this? I'd assume that it's because the rules it has are kind of complex, yet I didn't have to learn it from a book or by instruction. I've always been curious as to what it's like, as it is so natural to me, but not so for others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say so, every language is hard to learn (of course unless you're that one savant guy.. but hey? Whos watching..) because they all have there wierd things. I wouldnt go so far as to call actionscript like php, its a lot more like javascript.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard that English is one of the hardest languages to learn for those reasons, the rules don't make sense to a lot of people. You take words like comb and bomb and they sound different, there's no apparent reason why one has a long o and the other doesn't. And we have weird rules for silent letters, like the word through, pronounced thru, but then the word slough sounds like slof, instead of slu. What? Verb conjugation in English is also a lot different from other languages like the Romance languages. I get confused when I'm trying to learn conjugation (which is pretty logical), so I can imagine what someone who has been conjugating verbs all their life sees when they try to learn English. Just look the English dictionary, it's growing all the time and we have words that no one even uses, we have 10 synonyms for the same word. The word utilize is a perfect example of a completely useless word. There is no place in the English language for the word utilize. It is an exact synonym and can be used in any place where the word "use" is used, so why would anyone utilize utilize when they can just use use? My engineering writing teacher clued me into things like this, people just use a word like utilize to make whatever they're talking about sound more important, that's about the only use for it.The English language doesn't make a lot of sense, so I'm glad I already know it. It doesn't help when half of the "native" speakers can't even speak the language properly themselves, much less write in any cohesive form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no place in the English language for the word utilize. It is an exact synonym and can be used in any place where the word "use" is used, so why would anyone utilize utilize when they can just use use? My engineering writing teacher clued me into things like this, people just use a word like utilize to make whatever they're talking about sound more important, that's about the only use for it.
LOL! That's true, and a good point. Just like "pretentious" is a pretentious word for "fancy". :)Ok, I know they're not strictly synonyms, but they carry the exact same connotations I think.But seriously, I challenge anyone to find another word for synonym. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But seriously, I challenge anyone to find another word for synonym. :)
Does the phrase "another word" itself count? :) I think there isn't another word for synonym, because synonym is a term. A gramatical term. Most (if not all) terms don't have synonyms as far as I'm aware. What synonym can you give me for a "metaphor" for example? Whatever you can give, it would probably not be exactly the same term, but only close to it in usage.As for "use" and "utilize"... I almost agree. I personally use "utilize" when I mean "exploits completely" whereas I use "use" in all other general cases. For example - "Firefox and Opera utilize CSS 2.1 to describe the appearance of web pages"; "IE and other browsers use CSS to describe the appearance of web pages."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But seriously, I challenge anyone to find another word for synonym. :)
Adding to what boen_robot said, it is a term, and as terms in certain classes rarely have duplicates, as that would be like defining a number twice. But as for the meaning of the word, best I can think of is Parity. Saying something like "The synonym for this word is..." and "The parity of this word is..." would seem to work fairly close, but it's a stretch in some senses. I relent though, you can't find and exact match, the word synonym is just to specialized in what it means.A question if I may, is there something wrong with multiple words? I like it better that way, it keeps you tongue quite flexible. Though in some cases, the expression might very well be nuance, it's still giving people very broad ways of saying many things in many flavors. I'd call it a perk more than a kink. I find it impressive that I'll probably never truly know all the words in the English dictionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adding to what boen_robot said, it is a term, and as terms in certain classes rarely have duplicates, as that would be like defining a number twice.
I just find it so ironic that "synonym" does not have a synonym, whereas "antonym" has an antonym I guess... :)
A question if I may, is there something wrong with multiple words? I like it better that way, it keeps you tongue quite flexible. Though in some cases, the expression might very well be nuance, it's still giving people very broad ways of saying many things in many flavors. I'd call it a perk more than a kink. I find it impressive that I'll probably never truly know all the words in the English dictionary.
Not at all. That's part of the reason why I like the English language so much personally. I often find myself snapping my fingers looking for a word in Norwegian, and then I'll just say what I mean with an English word. There are so many more words that fit for different situations in English, and different idioms and expressions. Fine distinctions in ways to say things is really brilliant. If you know how to use language with distinction and utilize rhetorics as well, you can make someone look foolish, illiterate or directly primitive just by wording yourself in a particular way. It's great. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you know how to use language with distinction and utilize rhetorics as well
What, what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What, what?
Yes, it was deliberate, and it underlines what I was trying to say in that paragraph. So many different ways to say things. :)
If you know how to use language with distinction and utilize rhetorics as well
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=usehttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=utilizeUtilize:to put to use; turn to profitable account: to utilize a stream to power a mill.I would say there's a difference, sort of like what boen said."Use" rhetorics doesn't have the exact same meaning as "utilize" rhetorics. "Utilize" is more along the lines of "put to good use" or "make good use of". "Utilize" denotes a certain level of success with use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you know how to use language with distinction and utilize rhetorics as well, you can make someone look foolish, illiterate or directly primitive just by wording yourself in a particular way. It's great. :)
Isn't that the only way you should use language? :) The best weapon is biggest diction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't that the only way you should use language? :)
Well, there's unformal, conversational, colloquial, formal and rhetoric speech/writing, to mention a few... :)
The best weapon is biggest diction.
True, but if you constantly apply the "weapon", you won't be a fun person to hang around, quite the opposite more like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Utilize:to put to use;I would say there's a difference, sort of like what boen said.
There is no difference between use and utilize. You can literally replace the word utilize with the word use in any sentence and not lose any meaning. If you can show me a sentence where you swap the words and lose meaning, I'll say you're correct. Until then, the Bulgarian and the Norwegian should trust the native English speaker. Notice that the word utilize cannot be defined without using the word use.As for this:
"Utilize" denotes a certain level of success with use.
Think about this. Use denotes a certain level of success, you don't need another word to do that.Marketroids use words like these to make their writing sound intelligent. Another perfect example is the word leverage (another synonym for use). If I talk to you about using a product I sound like a salesman, but if I talk about leveraging a solution then all of a sudden I sound all engineery, and it means the exact same thing. Someone with a degree in marketing who knows squat about technology can use words like leverage, utilize, solution, deploy, etc, and make their writing sound technical. And equally deficient pointy haired bosses can read that and feel like they are technical as well. My technical writing prof in college left me with this gem of truth more then any other from his class:The quality of one's writing improves in direct proportion to how many words you can remove and not lose meaning.If you can say the same thing in 5 words that you can in 10, saying it in 5 will be much more effective with your audience, especially in technical writing. The same goes with syllables, if you can say something in one syllable (use) that you can in three (utilize), it will be more effective with your audience if you use fewer syllables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no difference between use and utilize. You can literally replace the word utilize with the word use in any sentence and not lose any meaning. Notice that the word utilize cannot be defined without using the word use.
Notice the links I gave to dictionary definition of "use" and "utilize" respectively. Note that in eight definitions of "use", not one of them include "turn to profitable account", nor any particularly "positive" word either for that matter.I never said they don't mean the same thing. While semantically the same, they carry different weight, and I would apply them differently based on what I was talking about, and what situation, hence the choice of "utilize rhetorics". Using that word there was, in fact, a choice of rhetorics.
Until then, the Bulgarian and the Norwegian should trust the native English speaker.
That's a cheap shot and a poor argument. I'm not basing what I'm saying on my personal opinion or perception, and I don't know what I've written earlier to make you believe that I would. I've been through rhetoric and technical writing myself, just this fall actually.
As for this:Think about this. Use denotes a certain level of success, you don't need another word to do that.
No, it doesn't, not more than any verb. It denotes action, but not necessarily success beyond action. That's my point. Again, see dictionary entries.
Marketroids use words like these to make their writing sound intelligent.
Well, marketroids are basically dumbasses with a little knowledge of rhetorics. And people who fall for it, well, pretty much the same for falling for the rhetorics.
Another perfect example is the word leverage (another synonym for use). If I talk to you about using a product I sound like a salesman, but if I talk about leveraging a solution then all of a sudden I sound all engineery, and it means the exact same thing. Someone with a degree in marketing who knows squat about technology can use words like leverage, utilize, solution, deploy, etc, and make their writing sound technical.
That just goes to show how important rhetorics is.
My technical writing prof in college left me with this gem of truth more then any other from his class:The quality of one's writing improves in direct proportion to how many words you can remove and not lose meaning.If you can say the same thing in 5 words that you can in 10, saying it in 5 will be much more effective with your audience, especially in technical writing. The same goes with syllables, if you can say something in one syllable (use) that you can in three (utilize), it will be more effective with your audience if you use fewer syllables.
With the technical writing part, in general, I couldn't agree more. As for how effective it will be with your audience, it depends on the audience. You don't want to sound inferior at a huge business conference for example. The art is letting situation dictate choice of language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notice the links I gave to dictionary definition of "use" and "utilize" respectively. Note that in eight definitions of "use", not one of them include "turn to profitable account", nor any particularly "positive" word either for that matter.
Well, dictionaries are written by people and they say different things. If you want to base the argument off dictionary entries, I've got one from Princeton University:http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?o2...=&s=utilize
S: (v) use, utilize, utilise, apply, employ (put into service; make work or employ for a particular purpose or for its inherent or natural purpose) "use your head!"; "we only use Spanish at home"; "I can't use this tool"; "Apply a magnetic field here"; "This thinking was applied to many projects"; "How do you utilize this tool?"; "I apply this rule to get good results"; "use the plastic bags to store the food"; "He doesn't know how to use a computer"
That definition applies to all the words use, utilize, utilise, apply, and employ. No distinction is made between them. This is the concise definition:
put into service; make work or employ for a particular purpose or for its inherent or natural purpose
(ok, I lied, you can define utilize without using the word use)No distinction is given to the outcome of the action. The word does not imply the outcome, the context that you use the word in implies the outcome. I can say "I used a hammer and built a horse" and it implies that I was successful. I can say "I utilized a hammer and hurt myself" and it implies that I failed. The important part is the context, I want to use a word that denotes that I performed an action, the context of where that word appears implies the result of the action, not the word itself.
That's a cheap shot and a poor argument. I'm not basing what I'm saying on my personal opinion or perception, and I don't know what I've written earlier to make you believe that I would. I've been through rhetoric and technical writing myself, just this fall actually.
That's not what I was trying to say, I wasn't trying to be personal. I was only trying to point out that I've been listening to the English language for the past 28 years and so I probably have an advantage over a non-native speaker in terms of understanding the language.
With the technical writing part, in general, I couldn't agree more. As for how effective it will be with your audience, it depends on the audience. You don't want to sound inferior at a huge business conference for example.
If using clearly understandable language makes me sound inferior to someone using words like leverage and deploy, then I probably don't want to be at the conference in the first place. If someone uses words that no one knows what they mean (have you ever leveraged anything?), and then I use clearly understandable words that people use in everyday speech, I would expect the audience to walk away with a greater understanding of what I said. I have never used words like leverage, deploy, solution, etc when I am speaking to my friends, family, or peers, so there's no reason to use them in any other situation. I don't sit around and design software with other people and use those terms, and I've never heard anyone use them in that context talking to me, they are marketing terms. So is utilize. When I am trying to communicate effectively, I use the same language that I do to communicate with anyone else. The difference between normal conversation and technical writing is understanding what your audience knows, and whether or not I have to explain what a server-side language is or if I can expect the audience to already be familiar. If I have to use technical terms the difference between a technical and a non-technical audience is only if I need to define the term for the audience. I wouldn't use a word like use for one audience, and utilize for another one.Again, show me a sentence where the meaning changes if you swap the words and I'll drop the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, dictionaries are written by people and they say different things. If you want to base the argument off dictionary entries, I've got one from Princeton University:http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?o2...=&s=utilizeThat definition applies to all the words use, utilize, utilise, apply, and employ. No distinction is made between them. This is the concise definition:(ok, I lied, you can define utilize without using the word use)No distinction is given to the outcome of the action. The word does not imply the outcome, the context that you use the word in implies the outcome. I can say "I used a hammer and built a horse" and it implies that I was successful. I can say "I utilized a hammer and hurt myself" and it implies that I failed. The important part is the context, I want to use a word that denotes that I performed an action, the context of where that word appears implies the result of the action, not the word itself.
AskOxford definition (which gives the same as my hard copy of Concise Oxford English Dictionary):utilize(also utilise) • verb make practical and effective use of. (my emphasis)Oxford University Press definition:util•ize (BrE also -ise) /jutlaz/ verb [vn] ~ sth (as sth) (formal) to use sth, especially for a practical purpose make use of: The Romans were the first to utilize concrete as a building material. The resources at our disposal could have been better utilized. Vitamin C helps the body utilize the iron present in your body.I don't know which one is more authoritative on the English language, Oxford or Princeton, Princeton being part of the Ivy League and Oxford being the oldest University in England and certainly an authority on the English language. Like you say, different dictionaries say different things, which pretty much neutralizes that argument for both of us.
That's not what I was trying to say, I wasn't trying to be personal. I was only trying to point out that I've been listening to the English language for the past 28 years and so I probably have an advantage over a non-native speaker in terms of understanding the language.
Having heard it all your life, parts of which you must have taken the language a bit for granted, you are just as prone to have missed things an outsider would spot as having an advantage. I'd say we're on equal as well as unequal footing, with an equal amount of advantages and disadvantages.
If using clearly understandable language makes me sound inferior to someone using words like leverage and deploy, then I probably don't want to be at the conference in the first place. If someone uses words that no one knows what they mean (have you ever leveraged anything?), and then I use clearly understandable words that people use in everyday speech, I would expect the audience to walk away with a greater understanding of what I said. I have never used words like leverage, deploy, solution, etc when I am speaking to my friends, family, or peers, so there's no reason to use them in any other situation.
I have never used the word "leverage" myself, and I don't use words that I don't know what means, nor do I look up fancy words to try and use them. I come across words, and if it feels natural to use them, they become part of my vocabulary. I wonder how you can not have used the word "solution" though. Are you sure that's the word you meant? :)A question may require simply an answer, but surely a problem must require a solution (or require solving if you want to use the verb)?
I don't sit around and design software with other people and use those terms, and I've never heard anyone use them in that context talking to me, they are marketing terms. So is utilize.
Leverage, yes, utilize, no (well, yes, but not exclusively). Leverage according to COED: 2. use (something) to maximum advantage: The organization needs to leverage its key resources. I agree that sounds awkward and unnatural.
When I am trying to communicate effectively, I use the same language that I do to communicate with anyone else. The difference between normal conversation and technical writing is understanding what your audience knows, and whether or not I have to explain what a server-side language is or if I can expect the audience to already be familiar. If I have to use technical terms the difference between a technical and a non-technical audience is only if I need to define the term for the audience. I wouldn't use a word like use for one audience, and utilize for another one.Again, show me a sentence where the meaning changes if you swap the words and I'll drop the argument.
It seems to me like you are making an argument of something that isn't one. I agreed "use" and "utilize" mean the same thing, but at the same time there's room for both in the English language, with nuances (1. a subtle difference or distinction in expression, meaning, response, etc.), and that is important in rhetorics.If after this post you see my point we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to make this a bigger argument then what I think it is. I understand your point, but my original point was that you can swap utilize and use and not lose any meaning, therefore one should never use the word utilize. Consider this:The Romans were the first to use concrete as a building material. The resources at our disposal could have been better used. Vitamin C helps the body use the iron present in your body.I don't think the meaning of any of those sentences has changed, nuance or otherwise, but they are easier to understand then the originals.You're right about the word solution, I didn't explain that enough. Obviously problems have solutions, I was talking about the marketing use of the word. Marketers seem to enjoy using the word solution when they don't know what they are talking about. A good example of that is something like .NET, where most of the people at Microsoft can't even define what it is, so people just call it a solution. Technical people see it otherwise, as an application framework, but marketers are not technical people. So yeah, problems have solutions, but I don't like it when people use solution as a synonym for product, like describing a toothbrush as an "oral health care solution". I can flip through the pages of Information Week, Network Computing, or any other free weekly technical publication and see this stuff all over the place.This example from the inside front cover of Information Week for the week of May 28:

Microsoft System Center is a family of IT management solutions
Is that the best way to describe it? Does that give anyone an idea of what it actually is? What am I paying for?
Deploy security upgrades to notebooks, even if they're powered off
What's wrong with the word "distribute", or "send"?
Business users get what they need, when they need it, and you get a solution that frees up your day
So many words, so little said.. is it software? hardware? personnel?
Our founders realized the SOA and Process Integration solutions you need now simply didn't exist
Were they on acid? Do you even know what an SOA is? If I tell you that stands for service-oriented architecture, does that make it any more clear?I like this one:
You wanted a way to systematically resolve process exception problems
That's exactly right. I was saying just last night that I needed a way to systematically resolve process exception problems. I'm not sure what they are, but I definately need to resolve them, systematically even.
So we built it for you. The result? Business Accelerator and Resolution Accelerator
Awesome, rolls off the tongue. My resolution is set at 1280x960 and I don't think this laptop has a 3D accelerator, so I'm glad they've got my back.I should point out that all of these examples came from the first 11 pages of the magazine, and every one appeared in an advertisement. I could not find examples of language like this in the articles themselves. The difference is that the technical writers writing the articles know what they are talking about, and the marketers writing the ads do not. It makes it real easy to read someone's writing and see whether or not they know what they are talking about.I didn't mean to make such a big deal about this, it's just something I notice on a daily basis that I don't agree with. I try to make my own writing as clear and understandable as possible, so if anyone sees me using language like this please just ban me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RememberBritish English != American English(I've always wanted to write a sentence like that :)).Two different dictionaries giving two different definitions is completely normal thing that can't be otherwise. Having studied more BE then AE, I'm staying on Jonas' side about the usage of "use" and "utilize".As for leverage... I don't use that word either, though when I read it, I think "exploit completely and then some". That you leverage something when you build on top of it. It doesn't sound logical to me for someone to leverage a... hammer for example. But it does sound logical to leverage a concept. But then again, that doesn't make complete sense either. According to my dictionary, "leverage" doesn't even exist as a verb. There are a few definitions given (most sound like "lifting with a lever" sort'a thing) and the only example is "to give someone leverage" meaning "to give someone advantage"... now that is a phrase pair that can be swapped without any loss of meaning. That is a case where I'd consider a word ("leverage" in this case) pointless and only kept for... fanciness.Oh, and I agree for the "solution" thing. Especially in the examples given. "Solution" is a word that should only be used for products aimed at end users. Products targeted at developers and system administrators (as the case with .NET for example) should be more technical, especially when written in a tech magazine (in which you know the audience knows what you're talking about), but since marketing people aren't much technical, that could be hard to achieve. Too bad really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. Several words have nuance, utilize might be one of them, but when I see writing peppered with words like I've been describing I immediately think that the author is trying to use confusing language in order to mask his own ignorance. I have stood next to people that I know personally, where I know exactly what their level of knowledge is, and I have heard them speak about subjects where I know they don't know the fundamentals. But they use confusing words like utilize, leverage, etc to describe what they are talking about and the person they are talking to is left with the feeling that the speaker knows what they are talking about when I know for a fact that they don't. After meetings like this the speaker will ask me questions about what they just said to figure out if they were remotely close to describing something that actually happens. Therefore I see words like this as being used by people with only a vague understanding to explain to someone with even less understanding. The audience probably won't understand what the speaker said, but they sure think the speaker knows what he's talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. Several words have nuance, utilize might be one of them, but when I see writing peppered with words like I've been describing I immediately think that the author is trying to use confusing language in order to mask his own ignorance.
I agree, me too. A basic rule of thumb I think is when explaining things that already involve difficult words and difficult concepts, one should go easier where you can and cut to the chase with as little superfluous words as possible. The best way to spot someone who don't know what they are talking about, whether you know this person and his/her level of knowledge or not, is to ask yourself the question:Could I have explained this in an easier way?If the answer is yes, chances are you know more than this person about the subject.So I would definetely cut down on difficult words where possible in such a situation. But what about when you're discussing or debating a subject known to both sides, no mystery, no concepts to grasp, just a disagreement about a trivial matter in the grand scheme of things? Like when writing an academic text? Or when in an argument somewhat like this? In such a situation, words with nuance can be the best weapon you'll have. When the other person starts flaming and going to personal attacks, that's when you know you've won. The subject discussed may be really difficult to decide on in the end, but you can win the discussion simply with the right words.
RememberBritish English != American English
That's a good point. American is characterized more by colloquial language, both in writing and speech. I'm not saying they can't be formal, but the Americans being (stereo-)typically more open and relaxed, it is reflected in everyday use of language. The British again are (stereo-)typically more formal and "uptight" (for lack of better word), until they go to the pub in the evening that is. :)
It doesn't sound logical to me for someone to leverage a... hammer for example. But it does sound logical to leverage a concept.
And I wouldn't utilize a hammer. But I might utilize rhetorics, which is what started this whole argument. :)Without thinking about too many word combinations, I'd say I could utilize abstract things (concepts), whereas I would probably use something concrete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Danke" is German. "Thanks" or "thank you" is probably what you're looking for. :)
Yes, I know it's German. I use it, sometimes! :)Maybe becouse it's the only word I know in German. :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...