User:SMcCandlish/Deutschlish patterns

Some inter-language interference habits of native German speakers, when using partially-fluent English, produce incorrect "Deutschlisch" constructions that need cleanup in our articles. Some of these include:

• "X allows to Y" (and variants with things like permits to) without specifying a referent: "This software allows to stream media from an Android device to an Internet-enabled television." In English, allow[s] to is transitive and requires a (human or other) referent regarding the action/result that is (or is not) allowed: "This software allows users to stream media to an Internet-enabled television"; "The government of Elbonia does not permit residents to permanently relocate from province to province without prior authorisation". An alternative structure, with no referent: "This software allows streaming of media to an Internet-enabled television"; "The government of Elbonia does not permit permanent residential relocation from province to province without prior authorisation". Note the sentence-structural changes required for this sort of conversion. It is often worth doing for concision, but not always, since it can sometimes lose key information, especially if the nature of the referent is quite particular, as in: "The Elbonian government does not permit non-citizens with work or student visas to long-term relocate from province to province without prior authorisation, but this restriction does not apply to citizens." The "X allows to Y" error in English usage is also common among native speakers of Malay and several other South Asian languages.
• "German-hyphens": It is common in German and some closely related Germanic languages to hyphenate noun phrases, when not running them together entirely. This is (usually) wrong in English, producing errors like "It was Johnson's first world-championship", and "This kind of pancreatic-cancer is usually terminal if not treated at the stage-one phase." English does not hyphenate a noun phrase except in special circumstances. Rather, a hyphens as a joining character is used in a compound adjective or other attributive, as in the stage-one phase in the example above, where stage-one is a compound adjective (grammaticalized as an attributive from the original noun phrase state one), in turn modifying the noun phase. Correct examples: "It was Johnson's first world championship" (noun phrase); "It was Johnson's first world-championship title" (compound modifier); "This kind of pancreatic cancer is usually terminal ..." (noun phrase); "This kind of pancreatic-cancer treatment is only efficacious at stage one" (compound modifier).
  • Some asides: Compound adverbs (verb instead of noun modifiers) are also sometimes hyphenated, especially when forming a conceptual unit and when the adjectival version would be hyphenated as well: "User123's is posting off-topic all the time (compound adverb modifying is posting compound verb); "User123 makes too many off-topic posts" (compound adjective modifying noun posts). Complex adverbial phrases that are not unitary but introducing distinct modifiers or a modifier of a modifier, including reduplication for stress, are not hyphenated: "She politely but firmly refuted his argument; "the conversation stopped uncomfortably abruptly"; "My poodle is very, very excited by the dog park". It's notable here that the adjectival versions would also not take hyphens: "She gave a polite but firm refutation of his argument" (not "polite-but-firm"); "The conversation came to an uncomfortably abrupt stop" (not "uncomfortably-abrupt"); "The dog park is a very, very exciting place to my poodle" (not "very-very-exciting").
  • To return to our theme of not hyphenating noun phrases, note that in the last of the above examples it is not dog-park. Noun phrases (a noun with one or more modifiers) is generally only hyphenated in English to avoid an ambiguity, as in chair-person (often fully compounded as chairperson), the gender-neutral 'person who chairs a body or meeting` alternative to masculine chairman. "Chair person" would be an awkward to humorous informal way of referring to someone who has something to do with, or a fondness for, a piece of furniture one sits on: "The person standing by the door was tall and a White male, but the chair person I'm not sure about, since they were sitting and had their back to me"; "I'm a more of a chair person than a couch person". Another case of hyphenated noun phrases is when using a novel and often humorous construction, as in "His job lately has basically been constant-chaos-fixer for his disorganized and incompetent department head". But such one-off neologisms are virtually never appropriate in encyclopedic material.
• "Why X does Y?" (and similar patterns) as questions instead of statements: "Why apt sometimes doesn't update all packages when you run sudo apt upgrade?" In English, the "why X does [not] Y" pattern (and variants, e.g. why X Ys: "why cats like boxes") is necessarily part of a declarative not interrogatory sentence, because of the word order. Correct examples: "An upgrade being be blocked by an unresolved dependency, or by a kernel-update flag, is why apt might not update all packages with sudo apt upgrade"; or, "Why apt sometimes does not update all packages when running sudo apt upgrade: upgrades may be blocked by unresolved dependencies, or by kernel-update flags." For an interrogatory sentence (a question), the word order is mandatorily different: "Why doesn't apt update all packages with sudo apt upgrade?"; or, more formally, "Why does apt not always update all packages when running sudo apt upgrade?" However, because Wikipedia does not pose questions for the reader to ponder in our encyclopedic material (per MOS:QUESTION), this particular linguistic glitch is not frequent on wiki.riteme.site, outside of talk-page discussions and occasionally in advice-to-editors material in the "Wikipedia:" or "Help:" namespaces. The "Why X does Y?" habit might also pertain to some speakers of Slavic and other languages; I'm not entirely certain.