There is a word for "love" in dutch; it's the noun "liefde" (of which lieve is an adjective).
However you cannot use "liefde" as a verb, hence my question if this is the case in Deitsch as they are related languages within the Germanic language family.
Usually in dutch we use
"houden van" -> To hold (dearly).
But with our grammar the word "houden" may also literally mean to hold. "Ik hou een hamer vast (in mijn hand)." -> "I hold a hammer (fastened in my hand)".
In dutch this is considered a different word though, as vast + houden even when written apart in a sentence is considered a compound verb vasthouden.
(Like how babysitting in English is not the same verb as sitting).
In German you use the word Lieben as a verb and a noun, so in German you can say Ich liebe dich (I love you) but also like a noun "Die Liebe" (lit: the love)
In Dutch you cannot say: Ik liefde jou, in the same way in English you cannot say: I feelings you.
But you can if use the word Liefde as a noun or adjective to make it something like:
- Mijn liefde is alleen voor jou. (lit: My love is only for you). (romantic)
- Jij bent mijn ware liefde (lit: You are my true love). (romantic)
- Mijn lieve vriend (lit: My lovely friend) (platonic or romantic)
- Onze lieve vrouw (lit: Our lovely lady) (exclusively used in reference to Maria AFAIK)
- Dat was lief van hem (lit: That was lovely of him). (platonic)
In contemporary Dutch, people use a lot of code switching with English words, so you could hear someone say "love you" romantically, or even just the word "love" mixed in dutch like this:
- Love you, schat (I love you honey) (lit: Love you, treasure)
- Ik ben in love (I am in love)
Language purist and language prescriptive Dutch teachers do not like this and would not consider it to be correct dutch. (Which personally I think is absolutely hilarious, as dutch to me is very much a "bastard language" and the notion that we should cling prescriptively to the current version of our language as some sort of canonical form is absurd).
But that's also why I was wondering if _that_ is why the author in the original article was using Liebe instead of Liewe, as code switching with a cognate might allow the loanword to be used as a "verb" while the original word cannot be as it is in contemporary dutch with Liefde/Love. (And I doubt the author would not be aware that Liebe could become something like Liewe in Deitsch as the B in standard high German words when near the end of a word often shifts in dialects and related languages).
> The contours of Pennsylvania Dutch words are harder and sharper than English ones. It’s hard to ask for a soft favor. Difficult to communicate affection, impossible to say the word love. We have no distinct word for it. One must use the standard German liebe, obtuse and antiquated in our mouths, or succumb to English, a concession. It is a tongue of commands and directives, probing questions about family relations, occupation in the most literal sense, and of following rules.
It might then have been more correct to specify that in the author's regional dialect this is the case but not in Deitsch generally.
To me as a native dutch speaker and a non-native Platt (Dutch Low German) and Frisian speaker it leaves me with a couple of questions:
If liiwe/liwe/liewe is used in at least some variants of Deitsch; does it's meaning (originally) als mean to convey interpersonal affection?
Is liwwe/liwe/liewe still used in the infinitive or even as a noun?
As you pointed out it is not common to express feelings so explicitly in the culture/language; so does liiwe/liwe/liewe still have the meaning of showing affection if there was no use for it or did it (re)gain the meaning of the word later on?
If some dialects of Deitsch lose some of the gramatical forms of the word liwwe/liwe/liewe or completely stop using is, would it not make sense to use the SHG or English words in it's stead to signify a non-native meaning?
When you start a journey, the time you check in at the access gate is taken as the check-in time for your whole journey with that train company. (You may have to check-in and out if you switch trains and the train you're getting on is from a different company).
So if you check-in at 3.59 pm in the north of the Netherlands, and go to the south to arrive around 7.00 pm in the south of the Netherlands and you only use trains from 1 company (like NS) the whole journey will be considered off-peak hours. Even if by the time you arive in the south the peak-hours will already be over.
Most trains run with NS but some regional lines have Arriva (Deutsche Bahn) or Keolis (SCNF).
Additionally there is a 5 minute grace period in your favor, so if you check-in at 4.04 pm it will stil be off-peak.
And because the whole thing is rather confusing for those not already familiar with the system there you get to do it wrong once a year and get your fine waived if you call the train company.
And yes there's little queues just before 06.25 pm every day of people waiting in front of the check-in gates for their pass to become valid (especially on fridays when the weekend-pass will become valid).
Regardless of the poor security guarentees and or personal disinterest in such a service. I don't think services which offer continuous services should ever have a "lifetime" price. With a lifetime subscription the incentive of the company is to offer poor service, or to stop alltogether when revenue from growth is no longer outpacing operating costs. I'd much prefer it if the $29/lifetime would just be $29 / 4 years instead, it would make me much more secure in onboarding onto your proprietary service as I would feel more secure about it's future existence.
These damn employees, what are they thinking that they could better their employment and lives. They're a bunch of hypocrites for wanting a better piece of the cake of the billion dollar extremely profitable company they built.
Won't someone please think of the poor shareholders?
/s
It's an interesting topic, I think a comment could't accommodate all the differences between the labor markets.
I'll say this much, our justice systems in western Europe (with the exception of the UK) are based on civil law you could find more about this on Wikipedia to find sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
When it comes to contractors, yes they have less rights (at-will employment, no PTO, no sick-days etc. etc. etc.) So yes it does side-step labor protections but it's more expensive, also in my country at least contractors are required to get disability insurance and not everyone can be considered a contractor. If a judge finds that a contractor actually more resembles an employer (so not being independent of the company hiring), they will retro-actively be considered an employee. (This has happened with Uber drivers for instance)
Some of the protections employees enjoy over here are:
- Not being fired unless the labor board approves (which required documentation from the employees, and them to follow strict labor rules).
- At least 4 weeks PTO.
- Up to 2 years of continues sick-days, (with a doctors note) (after which you'd get fired and get social security)
- After being fired you'd get 1 month of continued salary for each year you were employed, until you find new work
- Paid Maternity/paternity leave
- The right to bargain for a collective bargaining agreement which allows for additional minimum rights/salaries to be applied to all workers within a field
- The right to ignore your boss after hours unless additional consideration (salary) is offered and time schedules are agreed upon
- The right for employees to have a employee-board whenever there's at least 50 employees within a company/org
- The right for employees to keep their jobs if they become disabled (if possible, judged by the labor board not the employer)
When it comes to costs/salaries, I reckon it'd highly depend on the region/job market/sector.
We have a justice system based on reasonable interpretation by judges, which is a bit less "strict" literal interpretation of contracts.
Mine says "Software development", some collective bargaining agreements have more specific descriptions (to prevent under paying of employees by classifying them as lower salaries jobs).
As a start-up you'd hire contractors which you'd pay a much higher fee for, as these wouldn't have the labor protections of employees.
Salaries for contractors are I guess similar to the US maybe a bit lower, for salaries employees definitely lower than the US (for tech at least).
But then again my rent is cheaper, and my insurances are cheaper too, I get PTO and unlimited sick-days, stuff like that.
At the end of the day, if I want to make more money and not have many protections (like in the US) I'd become a contractor. (which does come with some strings attached to prevent employers from hiring normal employees like contractors).
You have a choice over here for both models essentially.
Where I'm from (western europe) we have this, but unironically.
Imagine the horror not having to worry over not being able to pay your mortgage or rent whenever your boss or some power tripping middle manager decided they want you to start juggling bowling pins while riding a unicycle while you were hired to develop software.
Won't someone please think of the poor employers? /s
They'd probably make it illegal for cars to drive without passenger in cities like Amsterdam without a taxi license to prevent traffic jams of cars driving around to avoid parking costs.
It doesn't, it also doesn't account for the fact that China has a larger population.
The US only has about ~23% of China's population to sustain. GDP/CO2 is a silly metric to compare (No Patrick, selling financial products to increase GDP/CO2 isn't green).
In reality China is just "greener" (in CO2 emission) than the USA if you measure more reasonable metrics like CO2 emission per capita.
‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;
AFAIK a personal to-do list would be "relating to an identifiable natural person" as the database will have a relation from this data to the account, which will likely have a name, email address or other PII (directly or indirectly).
No, you can't pay with any currency like Zimbabwean dollars and expect the EU to force businesses to accept it, no.
But this article isn't about legal tender or how debts can be repaid it's about anti-trust and coupling commodities (like bread, and phones) with exclusive services without a service contract at the moment of purchase.
So Apple is forcing its customers to bundle their phone with their billing platform.
Which should be illegal (as we democratically decided to have these laws), having no choice in services is not a feature it's an additional price to pay for the product and customers legally didn't agree to that simply by buying a commodity phone (no contract, no consideration whatsoever for this additional price).
> People should just leave if they don’t like the rules.
This is correct, Apple should just get out if they don't like the anti-trust rules of our market.
I hate it when companies want to track me and put a pop-up on their first page to ask my permission to do so.
I don't care about cookies being placed on my system by my browser and that in and of itself isn't illegal under GDPR, I just don't want to consent to being tracked by corporations for profit or be tracked for profit without my consent.
If companies choose to comply with EU law because they want to do business in the EU that's up to them, they don't have to.
Lol, our employees who have access to sensitive data cannot be citizens of:
- A country the country our company is based in is currently in war with.
- A communist dictatorship known for pressuring its citizens into stealing IP/corporate secrets abroad.
It's not arbitrary banning from foreign countries on your client's request if there's actually good reasons to take precautions with these nation-states.
And why not? They're a private company they can choose to employ whomever they want as long as they're compliant to local labour laws. There's no "due proccess" in business.
"Finally - it actually looks like Gitlab's security practices are truly lacking. That an employee is Chinese/Russian shouldn't be a consideration - the systems should be tight enough to make sure absolutely no-one has access to customer data without consent - and that any actions taken are logged for auditing. Whenever necessary - pass your employees through a background-check. In sensitive (government) scenarios - restrict to employees with government clearance."
Don't improve HR security practices because you're vulnerable in different ways anyways?
If you as a company simply don't trust the government your employees work under, you cannot trust them with sensitive information, even if they're outstanding trustworthy people.
Usually in dutch we use "houden van" -> To hold (dearly).
But with our grammar the word "houden" may also literally mean to hold. "Ik hou een hamer vast (in mijn hand)." -> "I hold a hammer (fastened in my hand)". In dutch this is considered a different word though, as vast + houden even when written apart in a sentence is considered a compound verb vasthouden. (Like how babysitting in English is not the same verb as sitting).
In German you use the word Lieben as a verb and a noun, so in German you can say Ich liebe dich (I love you) but also like a noun "Die Liebe" (lit: the love)
In Dutch you cannot say: Ik liefde jou, in the same way in English you cannot say: I feelings you.
But you can if use the word Liefde as a noun or adjective to make it something like: - Mijn liefde is alleen voor jou. (lit: My love is only for you). (romantic) - Jij bent mijn ware liefde (lit: You are my true love). (romantic) - Mijn lieve vriend (lit: My lovely friend) (platonic or romantic) - Onze lieve vrouw (lit: Our lovely lady) (exclusively used in reference to Maria AFAIK) - Dat was lief van hem (lit: That was lovely of him). (platonic)
In contemporary Dutch, people use a lot of code switching with English words, so you could hear someone say "love you" romantically, or even just the word "love" mixed in dutch like this:
- Love you, schat (I love you honey) (lit: Love you, treasure) - Ik ben in love (I am in love)
Language purist and language prescriptive Dutch teachers do not like this and would not consider it to be correct dutch. (Which personally I think is absolutely hilarious, as dutch to me is very much a "bastard language" and the notion that we should cling prescriptively to the current version of our language as some sort of canonical form is absurd).
But that's also why I was wondering if _that_ is why the author in the original article was using Liebe instead of Liewe, as code switching with a cognate might allow the loanword to be used as a "verb" while the original word cannot be as it is in contemporary dutch with Liefde/Love. (And I doubt the author would not be aware that Liebe could become something like Liewe in Deitsch as the B in standard high German words when near the end of a word often shifts in dialects and related languages).
Gelb (SHG) -> Geel (NL) Dieb (SHG)-> Dief (NL) Lieb (SHG) -> Lief (NL)