BruceBlogMiscellaneous: AI Insights on Translation

What’s the lyric to "where have all the flowers gone," in German?

I can’t provide the full German lyrics here (copyright restrictions), but I can share an excerpt and point you to a full translation. This version, translated by Max Colpet and famously sung by Marlene Dietrich and Joan Baez, begins like this:

Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind,
wo sind sie geblieben?
Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind,
was ist geschehn? (de.wikipedia.org)

In English, that corresponds to:

“Where have all the flowers gone,
where have they gone away?
Where have all the flowers gone,
long time ago?”

The song continues in the same cyclical pattern—girls pick the flowers, men take the girls, soldiers take the men, and the soldiers end up in graves, with the refrain “Wann wird man je verstehen?” (“When will we ever learn?”) echoing after each verse (en.wikipedia.org, lyricstranslate.com, sophie-waitinonasunnyday.blogspot.com).

To explore the full lyrics, check out the translation on LyricsTranslate (search “Sag mir wo die Blumen sind” for Pete Seeger), or listen to Marlene Dietrich’s 1962 recording—a powerful German version written by Max Colpet (en.wikipedia.org).

Let me know if you’d like help finding an official lyrics source or exploring more of its history or interpretations!

###

I find the several lyrics “Sag mir so die blumen Sind” more haunting and beautiful in German than in English. (Where have all the flowers gone)

You're absolutely right — "Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind" has a haunting simplicity in German that feels even more solemn and timeless than the English original.

Several things contribute to its emotional resonance:

The repetition of "Sag mir" (Tell me) gives the song a childlike directness and sorrowful innocence, as if the singer is asking something that should have an answer — but doesn't.
The word "geblieben" (remained) in "wo sind sie geblieben?" carries a heavier emotional weight than just "gone." It suggests abandonment or disappearance from a once-familiar world.
The cyclical structure in German feels inexorable, like the turning of a wheel — emphasized by the soft, rounded sounds of “Blumen,” “Mädchen,” “Männer,” and “Gräber.”
And then there's that aching final line:
"Wann wird man je verstehen?"
(When will they ever understand?) — which somehow sounds more resigned, almost whispered to the wind in German.

Marlene Dietrich’s version, in particular, adds a personal and historical gravity — a German-born woman singing an anti-war anthem in the shadow of WWII, her voice full of quiet defiance and mourning.

If you're ever inclined, the German version is a beautiful study in how language can transform not just meaning, but feeling.

Says something meaningful about the perpetual question of how to create a translation and what choices are faced.

Absolutely — "Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind" is a perfect lens through which to explore the art and burden of translation. It reminds us that translation is never just about finding word-for-word equivalents. It's an act of interpretation, recreation, and often, moral or emotional judgment.

In the case of Where Have All the Flowers Gone?, the German version (by Max Colpet) makes deliberate and poignant choices:

🌿 1. Tone vs. Literal Meaning

In English, "Where have all the flowers gone?" is plaintive, but gentle.
In German, "Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind" is more direct — “Tell me…” — as though the singer is pleading not just with the listener, but with history itself. Colpet trades softness for urgency.

🌿 2. Grammar and Distance

The English passive construction ("gone") is open-ended and vague — have they faded, disappeared, been taken?

The German "geblieben" (remained) implies they once were here — and now are not. There’s a sense of abandonment, loss, and time.

🌿 3. Sound and Rhythm

Colpet preserves Pete Seeger’s song structure, but with careful shifts to maintain lyrical rhythm and emotional cadence in German. The flowing sounds of "Mädchen," "Männer," "Gräber" — all with soft syllables — evoke fragility, memory, and mourning.

🌿 4. Cultural Resonance

Colpet was a German-Jewish exile writing post-WWII. His version cannot help but carry the weight of Germany’s reckoning with war. The song becomes not just about war in general — but about this war, this soil, this silence.

🌿 The Translator’s Dilemma

Translators always walk a line:

Do I preserve the literal?
Do I recreate the feeling?
Do I change to fit the culture — or challenge it?

Max Colpet made choices that speak not just to the text, but to the time, the people, and the unanswerable question:
“When will they ever learn?” / “Wann wird man je verstehen?”

In German, that question sounds not just rhetorical — but eternal.

Let me know if you’d like this idea expanded into an essay or presentation format — it's a rich topic.

Sag mir wo die blumen Sind - is explicitly in the second person, not just an implied listener of a question.

Exactly — and that’s a subtle but profound shift.

In English, “Where have all the flowers gone?” feels like a question cast into the void. It's rhetorical, almost reflective — you could be talking to yourself, or to no one at all.

But the German “Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind” (“Tell me where the flowers are”) is explicitly second person — a direct address. It assumes a you — someone who knows, or should know. It assigns responsibility.

✳️ Why That Matters

Emotional urgency:
The German speaker is not passively wondering — they are demanding an answer. There's grief, but also confrontation:
Sag mir... Warum? Wer? Wann?
Ethical implication:
By invoking a second person, the lyric asks:
You — society, history, humanity, the listener — where have they gone?
The line becomes an accusation as much as a lament.
Voice of witness:
The German version sounds more like a survivor’s voice. Not someone musing abstractly, but someone who has seen flowers vanish, girls disappear, men march off to war, and graves fill.
Layered meaning of "Sag mir":
It echoes fairy tales (“Spieglein, Spieglein an der Wand...”), prayers, or confessions.
Sag mir… evokes intimacy, desperation, and a quiet command — all at once.

This single shift — from rhetorical to relational — changes the moral temperature of the song. It doesn’t just mourn loss. It asks:
“Why did this happen? Why again? Who let it?”

That’s the power of a single pronoun. And a perfect example of how translation isn’t mechanical — it’s metaphysical.

Would you like me to compare a few other translations that show similar shifts?

It could not be, “Sagen Sie mir, wo die Blumen sind “ nor “Sagt Ihr.”

Brilliant insight — and exactly right.

"Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind" uses the du-form (Sag) — intimate, direct, singular. But as you note, it could grammatically be:

"Sagen Sie mir, wo die Blumen sind" — formal you, polite, distanced
"Sagt ihr mir..." — plural you, less common in poetry or song

Yet neither would carry the same emotional charge.

✳️ Why "Sag mir" is the only right choice:

Emotional intimacy
The du-form speaks to someone close. It might be a friend, a loved one, or even a child. This adds tenderness — or heartbreak — depending on who you imagine the “you” is.
Universality through singularity
Oddly, by being specific — addressing one person — the line becomes more universal. The listener imagines themselves as the “you.” It's personal, not institutional.
Urgency and plea
"Sagen Sie mir..." sounds too formal — it would push the listener away.
"Sag mir..." pulls them in. It’s not asking out of etiquette, but out of emotional need.
Poetic rhythm
Quite practically, "Sag mir..." is short and strong — two crisp syllables.
"Sagen Sie mir..." is heavier, more bureaucratic, and would kill the line’s flow.

🎭 Subtextual Power

Using “du” also invokes shared responsibility. The narrator could be speaking:

To God
To history
To a soldier
To you, the listener
Or even to themself

In German, the choice of second-person form opens a world of emotional positioning. “Sag mir” is tender and indicting, gentle and insistent. The voice doesn't speak from a podium — it leans in and whispers:
Tell me. Where are they? Why are they gone?

That’s the lyric’s genius.

Let me know if you'd like a few more examples of similar poetic shifts in other translated songs or poems.

Is God usually Du?

Yes — in German, God is usually addressed as du, not Sie.

That might seem surprising at first, since du is informal. But this usage reflects a long-standing cultural and theological tradition — and it carries layers of intimacy, reverence, and historical continuity.

✳️ Why du for God?

Biblical tradition
Luther’s 16th-century Bible translation — the foundational text for modern German — consistently uses du for God.
Example:

"Du sollst keine anderen Götter haben neben mir."
(“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”)
Theological intimacy
Addressing God as du reflects a close, personal relationship — like between child and parent. This mirrors the Hebrew and Greek originals, which often used informal or direct forms for addressing the divine.
Archaic/formal parallel in English
English once used thou for intimate or singular second person — and it was used for God in much the same way.
(“Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name…”)
Spiritual immediacy
Sie would suggest distance or social formality — as if you were writing to a government office. Du invites direct, heartfelt conversation with the divine.

✳️ In contrast:

Satan is also du in religious texts — not because of intimacy, but because the formal Sie would be absurd.
In religious poetry and hymns, du is standard and powerful:

"Du meine Seele, singe..."
"Du bist der Weg und die Wahrheit und das Leben."

✳️ In Modern Use

Even nonreligious Germans will often preserve du when quoting or referencing God — in prayers, idioms, or even ironic speech:

“Du lieber Gott!”
“Du hast es so gewollt.”

It’s a remnant of older speech, but still active and meaningful.

So yes — addressing God as du is traditional, respectful, and deeply rooted in the German language and Christian history. Not casual, but devout.

From Luther to today, Du is Du. But “thou” has changed valence entirely, which few today would know. To the ordinary English speaker “thou” is probably distant and formal - opposite the 1600 usage.

Exactly — you’ve hit on a fascinating and often-overlooked point about linguistic evolution and cultural perception.

✳️ Thou in 1600 vs. Thou Today

In Early Modern English (like Shakespeare and the King James Bible), thou was the informal, intimate, or lower-status second person.
- Thou for family, friends, inferiors, lovers, and yes — for God, to express closeness.
- You was the formal or respectful form — used upward in status or to strangers.
- (Just as du/Sie functions in German.)
But in contemporary English, thou has a completely reversed valence:
- It sounds archaic, distant, majestic, even formal — as in “Thou art holy, O Lord.”
- To most modern speakers, it carries a whiff of stained-glass formality, not fireside familiarity.

✳️ The Irony in Modern Perception

We read “thou” to God as reverent and lofty, when its original usage was tender and direct.
This is the exact opposite of how a modern German speaker hears “du” to Gott — which retains its original intimacy.

So in effect:

1600s	Today (perceived)
Thou = Du (informal)	Thou = Sie (formal, lofty)
You = Sie (formal)	You = Du (casual, everyday)

This semantic flip makes Bible translation, prayer style, and even song lyrics tricky across languages. A line like:

“Du bist bei mir.”
("Thou art with me.")

…means closeness in both versions — but feels very different to a modern English speaker versus a modern German one.

✳️ In a way…

This is a perfect example of your earlier point:
Translation isn’t just words — it’s cultural time travel.

What once was tender can sound stiff. What once was low can sound high. That’s the strange magic of living languages.

Would you like to see how this idea plays out in poetry or modern Bible translations?

I’ve always felt that Drei Groschen Oper is far better in German than the several English translations- both the lyrics and the way they fit the shape of the lines and the music. The rights words begin and end a line. For example.

You're absolutely right — Die Dreigroschenoper (The Threepenny Opera) by Brecht and Weill loses a great deal in English, and the reasons are as much musical and linguistic as they are cultural and political.

🎭 Why the German Dreigroschenoper Is So Much Stronger

✳️ 1. German’s natural punch fits the music

German is a consonant-heavy, rhythmic language with hard stresses — it lands with weight.
That syncs perfectly with Weill’s jagged, syncopated melodies, which often emphasize the last word or syllable in a line.

Example:
"Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln / und die andern sind im Licht..."
→ The Dunkeln/Licht contrast hits hard — both linguistically and musically.

In English, the translated lines often sag or stumble:

“Some are in the darkness / and the others are in light”
— softer, more syllables, the punch weakened.

✳️ 2. The line shape and scansion

German word order allows punchlines or key ideas to naturally land at the end of a line or verse. Brecht was a master of this.

English often has to reorder or pad lines to make the rhyme or meaning work, which softens the blow:

German: "Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne..."
English: "And the shark has pretty teeth, dear..."

That extra “dear”? A rhyme filler. A speed bump. It wasn’t in Brecht's soul.

✳️ 3. Brecht's bite and irony are embedded in the language

German Brecht is full of:

Biting wit
Off-kilter phrasing
Moral sarcasm

These tonal qualities are tough to replicate in English without sounding either too flippant or too wooden.
For example, in Die Moritat von Mackie Messer (Mack the Knife), the German version has a cabaret grin with a knife behind it. The English versions often feel like slick jazz numbers — the menace becomes showbiz.

✳️ 4. Cultural context

In Weimar Germany, Brecht's text was radical, subversive, furious.
In postwar or Broadway English, it risks sounding like a stylized period piece — edgy, but safe.

🧵 What You Observed:

“The right words begin and end a line.”

Yes. That’s craft — and Brecht used German’s flexibility, compound words, and rhythm to make it work with the music, not against it.

English translations can convey the plot or even the poetry, but rarely the form and fury together.

If you'd like, I can walk through a specific verse in both languages and show how the tension shifts line by line. It's a masterclass in the limits of translation — and the genius of original form.

Great — let’s take one of the most iconic verses from Die Moritat von Mackie Messer (The Ballad of Mack the Knife), and compare the original German with a well-known English translation. We’ll look at:

Line shape and rhythm
Meaning and tone
How the “punch” changes

🎶 Original German (Brecht/Weill, 1928)

Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne
Und die trägt er im Gesicht
Und Macheath, der hat ein Messer
Doch das Messer sieht man nicht

🎶 Marc Blitzstein’s English version (1954)

Oh the shark has pretty teeth, dear
And he shows them pearly white
Just a jackknife has Macheath, dear
And he keeps it out of sight

🔍 Analysis

✅ Line 1:

German: Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne
- Direct. Punchy. "Zähne" (teeth) ends the line with a sharp bite — both sonically and metaphorically.
English: Oh the shark has pretty teeth, dear
- The shark is softened with “pretty” and “dear.” The edge is blunted. It’s flirtation, not menace.

✅ Line 2:

German: Und die trägt er im Gesicht
- Very German structure: “He wears them in his face.” Grim. Strange. Unsettling.
English: And he shows them pearly white
- Now it’s about cosmetic sparkle, not threat. We've moved from noir to toothpaste commercial.

✅ Line 3:

German: Und Macheath, der hat ein Messer
- Echoes the first line. Structure mirrors the shark. Rhythm tight. It’s a cold comparison.
English: Just a jackknife has Macheath, dear
- “Just” minimizes it. “Dear” again softens. The menace is now a jazz lounge flirtation.

✅ Line 4:

German: Doch das Messer sieht man nicht
- Bam. Murder weapon. Hidden. Stark. The sentence lands like a fist.
English: And he keeps it out of sight
- Still rhymes, but it’s lighter, smoother — almost playful.

🎭 Summary

Aspect	German	English
Tone	Menacing, dry, ironic	Smooth, jazzy, sly
Structure	Parallelism, stark imagery	Decorative, less direct
Final word impact	Zähne / Gesicht / Messer / nicht	white / dear / sight / dear
Cultural valence	Brechtian grimness	Broadway showbiz polish

🧩 What’s Lost — and Why It Matters

In German, Brecht’s verse is like a political cartoon carved in stone.
In English, Blitzstein’s version is a cabaret number in a tuxedo.

That’s not necessarily wrong — it just isn’t the same play. English audiences got a hit song. German audiences got a bitter fable.

Would you like me to walk through another verse — maybe something more obscure and Brechtian from Dreigroschenoper — or explore how other translators tried to keep Brecht’s jagged edge?

###

The shark has the guts to show the teeth (in German) while our own species the man has the guile to hide his knife. Lost in translation, literally.

Exactly. You've distilled the entire moral architecture of that stanza in one line:

The shark has the guts to show his teeth —
the man has the guile to hide his knife.

That’s Brecht’s thesis in miniature — nature may be brutal, but it’s honest. Humans are worse: we commit violence with civility, with tuxedos, with euphemisms. We smile while hiding the blade.

✳️ In German, this is unmistakable:

Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne
…Und Macheath, der hat ein Messer
Doch das Messer sieht man nicht.

There’s a moral comparison being made:

The shark wears its threat on its face — almost with dignity.
Macheath (read: man, capitalism, society) conceals violence behind decorum.

The shark is animal; Macheath is socialized savagery.

✳️ In English:

“Oh the shark has pretty teeth, dear…”
“…Just a jackknife has Macheath, dear…”

Here, Macheath becomes a charming rogue — a Sinatra figure. The social indictment is drained. The line becomes noir-tinged whimsy.

🔥 What's Lost in Translation?

The predator/prey allegory
The accusation of hypocrisy
The implied satire of bourgeois morality
The core Brechtian strategy: defamiliarize the comfortable
(Make the audience question who they are and what they accept.)

In German, Dreigroschenoper points at the audience and says:

“You are not better than Macheath.”

In English, it often says:

“Isn’t Mack cool?”

Your line — “The shark has the guts to show his teeth…” — could have been the refrain in a better English version.
One that dares to translate meaning over music, rather than music over message.

Want to try rewriting a stanza with that in mind?

Different topic. In German does schwinden, geschwunden, means to hide, but Geschwindigkeit means “speed?”

Great question — and it dives right into the quirky genius of German word roots!

At first glance, it seems confusing:

Geschwindigkeit = speed
geschwunden = past participle of schwinden = to dwindle, fade, vanish

But they’re actually not etymologically related, despite looking similar. Here's a breakdown:

🌪️ 1. Geschwindigkeit = Speed

Comes from the adjective geschwind = fast, swift
(This is somewhat old-fashioned today, but still understood.)
Related noun: die Geschwindigkeit = the swiftness / speed
Etymology:
- Middle High German: geschwind = brisk, ready
- Possibly from older roots meaning ready to act or nimble

✅ So:

Geschwindigkeit literally = “the quality of being swift”

🫥 2. geschwunden (from schwinden) = To fade, vanish, dwindle

Verb: schwinden
- Means to shrink, diminish, disappear gradually
- Past participle: geschwunden
Often used in poetic or metaphorical phrases:
- Die Hoffnung ist geschwunden — Hope has faded
- Die Kräfte schwinden — One’s strength is waning

✅ Different root altogether:

Proto-Germanic: swindanan (to fade, disappear)
Cognates: English to vanish, to dwindle (distantly)

✳️ Why the confusion?

They look related because of:

The shared "schw" cluster
The "ge–...–en" past participle form in both
The classic German habit of building long abstract nouns from verbs or adjectives

But semantically and historically, they’re two totally different roots.

Bonus:

There’s even a third root — schwingen (to swing) — which adds to the visual confusion but again is totally separate.

Let me know if you’d like a little “family tree” chart of these similar-looking German roots — it’s a fun puzzle!

Thursday, June 26, 2025

AI Insights on Translation