PugJesus@lemmy.worldM to NonCredibleDefense@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 years ago5th generation warfarelemmy.worldimagemessage-square37fedilinkarrow-up1617arrow-down112
arrow-up1605arrow-down1image5th generation warfarelemmy.worldPugJesus@lemmy.worldM to NonCredibleDefense@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square37fedilink
minus-squareKatzastrophe@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up129·2 years agoIf anyone wants to know, “Beweglichertorpfostenkrieg” is literally just “moving goal posts war” disguised as a german compound word.
minus-square🐑🇸 🇭 🇪 🇪 🇵 🇱 🇪🐑@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up60arrow-down5·2 years agoAs a German, this word was compounded incorrectly anyway. Adjectives don’t get compounded. So it would be “Beweglicher Torpfostenkrieg”
minus-squarecircuscritic@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up64arrow-down5·2 years agoLook guys, I found the Grammer Nazi.
minus-squareOoops@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up13arrow-down2·edit-22 years agoIt’s actually quite easy to correct, so why not mention it? Make that “moving goal post war” a “goal post movement war” and now it’s all nouns and valid to compound them.
minus-squarecircuscritic@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up27arrow-down2·edit-22 years agoGerman…Grammer…Nazi… Sir, this is a Noncredible Wendy’s, not a Highly Credible Outback Steakhouse.
minus-squareTurun@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up22·edit-22 years agoThis is wrong. That would describe a certain type of war, but specify that the war is movable. I think the “Torpfostverschiebekrieg” mentioned in another comment would be the best solution.
minus-squareSubArcticTundra@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·2 years agoBut surely wouldn’t that imply the existence of such thing as a ‘goal post war’? Because the term is meant to mean ‘(moving goal post) (war)’, and not ‘(moving) (goal post war)’
minus-squareFleetingTit@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·2 years agoBeweglicher-Torpfosten-Krieg looks about right.
minus-squareChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·edit-21 year agodeleted by creator
minus-squarekhapyman@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoOn the other hand in Finnish that’s can be one word: maalitolpansiirtosota. No sense implied.
minus-squareGork@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 years agoHmm they can try using that as the new Паляниця (Palanitsya).
minus-squaresharpiemarker@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoIs it not a German compound word?
minus-squarewert_straffer@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up21·2 years ago„Torpfostenbewegungskrieg“ would be correct. I‘d prefer „Torpfostverschiebekrieg“ though.
minus-square🐑🇸 🇭 🇪 🇪 🇵 🇱 🇪🐑@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up17arrow-down1·2 years agoIt’s incorrect actually! We don’t compound adjectives (Beweglicher)
minus-squaresharpiemarker@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·2 years agoInteresting! Thank you for the explanation.
minus-squareParsnipWitch@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·2 years agoWe do it though… it’s just not correct.
If anyone wants to know, “Beweglichertorpfostenkrieg” is literally just “moving goal posts war” disguised as a german compound word.
As a German, this word was compounded incorrectly anyway. Adjectives don’t get compounded. So it would be “Beweglicher Torpfostenkrieg”
Look guys, I found the Grammer Nazi.
It’s actually quite easy to correct, so why not mention it?
Make that “moving goal post war” a “goal post movement war” and now it’s all nouns and valid to compound them.
German…Grammer…Nazi…
Sir, this is a Noncredible Wendy’s, not a Highly Credible Outback Steakhouse.
This is wrong. That would describe a certain type of war, but specify that the war is movable.
I think the “Torpfostverschiebekrieg” mentioned in another comment would be the best solution.
But surely wouldn’t that imply the existence of such thing as a ‘goal post war’? Because the term is meant to mean ‘(moving goal post) (war)’, and not ‘(moving) (goal post war)’
Beweglicher-Torpfosten-Krieg looks about right.
Ah yes that makes sense
deleted by creator
On the other hand in Finnish that’s can be one word: maalitolpansiirtosota. No sense implied.
Hmm they can try using that as the new Паляниця (Palanitsya).
Is it not a German compound word?
„Torpfostenbewegungskrieg“ would be correct. I‘d prefer „Torpfostverschiebekrieg“ though.
It’s incorrect actually! We don’t compound adjectives (Beweglicher)
Interesting! Thank you for the explanation.
We do it though… it’s just not correct.