Advertising
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

 
  •  
  • Subject

    myself

    Sources

    "I will be in touch. If not myself, one of my colleagues."

    It is only young sales people trying to impress who use the word myself in that context. As if suggesting there is another version available, a more helpful version."

    Comment

    Ich habe diese beiden Sätzen in einem britischen Roman gelesen und wüsste gerne, wie man das übersetzen kann...


    "Ich werde mich bei Ihnen melden. Wenn nicht ich selbst/persönlich, dann einer meiner Kollegen."

    Nur junge Verkäufer, die (ihre Kunden) beeindrucken wollen, verwenden in diesem Zusammenhang den Begriff "ich selbst/ich persönlich. Als würden sie andeuten, dass noch eine andere Version verfügbar ist, eine hilfreichere Version."


    Klingt irgendwie seltsam ....

     

    Author J_u_l_i_a (922683) 29 Feb 20, 21:06
    Comment

    "Myself is best used either reflexively (I have decided to exclude myself from consideration) or intensively (I myself have seen that. I've done that myself). The word shouldn't appear as a substitute for I or me (my wife and myself were delighted to you). Using it that way, as an "untriggered reflexive," is thought somehow to be modest, as if the reference were less direct. Yet it is no less direct, and the user may unconsciously cause the reader or listener to assume an intended jocularity, or that the user is somewhat doltish." --Bryan Garner, Modern English Usage


    The sentence that Julia quotes could put us in a dilemma, because the strictly correct If not I, one of my colleagues may sound overly formal for everyday speech. The sentence could be recast to avoid the problem: If I don't contact you, one of my colleagues will.

    #1Author Bob C. (254583)  29 Feb 20, 23:19
    Comment

    Den ersten Satz würde ich etwas freier übersetzen: "Wir werden uns bei Ihnen melden. Ich selbst oder einer meiner Kollegen / ein Kollege von mir."


    Das mit der "more helpful version" verstehe ich nicht wirklich.

    #2Author mbshu (874725) 01 Mar 20, 05:27
    Comment

    Hallo mbshu, geht mehr genauso... Vielleicht kann uns noch einer auf die Sprünge helfen?!?

    #3Author J_u_l_i_a (922683) 01 Mar 20, 08:18
    Comment

    Leicht OT: Bin ich der einzige, den das Futur hier stört? "Ich melde mich bei Ihnen", das wäre die geläufige Form. Nicht "ich werde...", das hat sowas Gewichtiges, Ominöses. (Damit passt es zwar vielleicht zu dem jungen Verkäufer, der ja etwas aufgeblasen daherkommt, aber das Englische gibt das im ersten Satz IMHO noch nicht her.)

    #4AuthorMr Chekov (DE) (522758)  01 Mar 20, 09:48
    Comment

    Das Futur ist nicht nötig, aber ich empfinde es auch nicht als störend.


    Nr. 3: Geht mir ...

    #5Author mbshu (874725) 01 Mar 20, 09:55
    Comment

    Gute Idee, das in #2 ...

    #6Author no me bré (700807) 01 Mar 20, 11:25
    Sources

    Das mit der "more helpful version" verstehe ich nicht wirklich

    Comment

    Sicher bin ich mir auch nicht. Es könnte aber so sein, dass jemand, dem gesagt wird "Keine Angst, wir werden Ihr Problem lösen. Wenn meine Kollegen das nicht schaffen, werde ich mich höchstpersönlich darum kümmern" das so versteht, dass von dem Sprecher noch eine Luxusversion zur Verfügung steht, die nur bei schwierigen Fällen zum Einsatz kommt. Also eine Art empfunder Unterschied zwischen dem aktuellen Gesprächspartner und dem durch den Begriff "höchstpersönlich" idealisierten zukünftigen Helfer.

    #7Author Frolf (DE) (1270837) 01 Mar 20, 12:12
    Comment

    Sieht nach einer etwas missglückten Pointe aus. Wenn es schon vier Teilnehmer in diesem Faden nicht verstehen (oder sich nicht sicher sind, wie Frolf)...

    #8AuthorMr Chekov (DE) (522758)  01 Mar 20, 12:29
    Comment

    ... als ob es eine andere Möglichkeit gäbe, eine bessere (hilfreichere) Lösung.


    So rate ich das.


    #9Author Fragezeichen (240970) 01 Mar 20, 17:56
    Comment

    It seems to me that the analysis provided by Garner in #1 should help clear up some of the confusion surrounding the use of myself in the quotation under discussion. In that quote, myself means nothing more or less than I: "If not I, one of my colleagues." As Garner explains, using myself inappropriately may cause the reader or listener to assume an intended jocularity or that the user is somewhat doltish. And, we can now add, may confuse non-English speakers.

    #10Author Bob C. (254583) 01 Mar 20, 18:00
    Sources

    ...may cause the reader or listener to assume an intended jocularity or that the user is somewhat doltish

    Comment

    Das passt hier aber inhaltlich gar nicht zu den zwei folgenden Sätzen. Und einen Zusammenhang mit der "more helpful version" sehe ich so auch nicht.

    #11Author Frolf (DE) (1270837) 01 Mar 20, 18:17
    Comment

    All it means is as if there were another version of me that is more helpful.

    #12Author Bob C. (254583) 01 Mar 20, 19:22
    Comment

    ..... immer noch nicht ...


    Ok, we´re talking about a young salesman who says words he shouldn´t say because he´s either prone to intended jocularity or somewhat doltish and who´s furthermore trying to impress by using these words because he wants to suggest that there is another version of him that is more helpful ???


    It´s only now that I´m beginning to feel confused...

    #13Author Frolf (DE) (1270837) 01 Mar 20, 19:55
    Comment

    The passage quoted from Garner mentions jocularity and doltishness only as two possible examples of what impression any particular speaker's words might make. He can of course not account for all the various ways in which myself gets abused.


    The speaker quoted in the original question is simply using myself where I would have been correct. That's all. There's nothing to be confused about. It's a very common error in English.

    #14Author Bob C. (254583) 01 Mar 20, 21:07
    Comment

    Ok, danke

    #15Author Frolf (DE) (1270837) 01 Mar 20, 21:43
    Comment

    For further clarification of the misuse of "myself", or for further amusement, here are some examples I collected in the wild (names suppressed to protect the guilty parties):


    At least this is what he told John and myself


    Myself and Robin have worked with the City of Riverside for years and have an understanding of their system and personnel.


    It’s going to take bold and quick action by myself and by City Council…


    Please contact JO or myself if you have any questions or need additional information.


    If you are even thinking (even remotely) that you will be attending the meeting, please send an email to myself and EG


    My husband wants to put my 17-year old daughter on the pill but myself and my 17-year old are against it.


    And so long as the war on terror goes on, and so long as there's a threat, we will inevitably need to hold people that would do ourselves harm.


    Neither bike pulled over to allow cars to pass, even when there was room to do so, and myself and several other cars were forced to follow them all the way down to Highway 9.


    Myself and a woman cyclist boarded the one that was not at the north end of the train.


    Attached is the document that was given out at the General Plan task force meeting from myself, VH, and JG as approved by parks staff for inclusion into the discussion on park policy in the General plan


    #16Author Martin--cal (272273) 02 Mar 20, 00:37
    Comment

    Thanks for that useful illustration, Martin. My God. The situation is worse than I realized.

    #17Author Bob C. (254583) 02 Mar 20, 01:15
    Comment
    It's true that 'myself' is often used unnecessarily. Coincidence: my mom was just fussing this evening about an article she came across using it as the subject, like 'Myself and my companions went to ...' There, as in the bad examples in #16, there's no added emphasis, so there's no reason not to just use 'My companions and I.'

    Nevertheless, the example in the opening post isn't that same glaring type of error, so it seems actually more wrong of the writer or narrator to jump on it as a chance to show off or put someone else down.

    In the OP it really is for emphasis, which is how it's supposed to be used. Yes, it's a shortened form of 'If not I myself,' but surely Bob is right to observe that most of us would seldom say 'It is I' under any circumstances. So why not shorten it as the speaker did, leaving 'myself' to convey the emphasis, the sense of 'I personally,' as opposed to some one else? That distinction in meaning is what it's for.

    #18Author hm -- us (236141) 02 Mar 20, 06:50
    Comment

    In den meisten Beispielen in No. 16 glauben die Sprecher wohl, es sei unhöflich, I zu verwenden. So wie manche Leute im Deutschen meine Wenigkeit sagten, um ich zu vermeiden.

    #19Author mbshu (874725) 02 Mar 20, 09:55
    Comment

    @ um ich zu vermeiden. - Gibts auch in Leo etwa so: dieser Muttersprachler meint das auch ;-)

    #20Author manni3 (305129)  02 Mar 20, 10:05
    Comment

    Rather than avoiding "I", I actually think that most of the cases in #16 represent the use of "myself" to avoid using "me", which would be the natural word to use in almost all cases (even in the nominative; e.g. me and Robin worked for the city...)


    And, along these lines, regarding the original posting, it would certainly be my natural instinct to say something like "I'll be in touch. and if it's not me, it'll be one of my colleagues."


    PS - caveat for non-native speakers - this would be in an informal conversational setting, and not to be used in formal writing, or when taking your English competency exam.


    #21Author Martin--cal (272273)  02 Mar 20, 19:29
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
  automatisch zu   umgewandelt