Talk:Duden

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Linguistics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Books: Reference works This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles This article is supported by the Reference works task force. This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

I removed the following sentence, which 169.200.215.17 (welcome, by the way!) put in after the first sentence in the opening paragraph:

Its English-language equivalent would be the Oxford English Dictionary (OED).

I can think of a number of good reasons why this comparison ought to be here (for example, it means that the Duden is very important), but I can think of even more reasons why the comparison is misleading. For example, the history of the normative status of Duden orthography is unique. Also, the Rechtschreibduden can be found in pretty much every home and office in Germany, while the OED is a rarer sight in the UK. Moreover, the structuring of the Duden into volumes is completely different from the OED's. Etc.

Maybe we can find a healthy comparison that is equally good at explaining Duden's significance (if that was 169.200.215.17's aim), without simultaneously suggesting misleading equivalances to OED? Arbor 19:51, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see that both the English and German entries for Duden call it a dictionary. I'm not sure if I would refer to the 12-volume series as a "dictionary", because the series is essentially a comprehensive reference for the German language, and also because Duden has dictionaries, such as the Universalwörterbuch.

Translated, Wörterbuch is a dictionary, and there are no fewer than seven Wörterbücher in the Duden series, not including Volume 1 Rechtschreibung which really is a dictionary as well. It seems awkward to me to have a dictionary contain sub-dictionaries when each stands on their own as a reference work in and of itself.

Duden's web site does not refer to the Duden as a dictionary, but rather a series, die Reihe Duden.

Anyone have any thoughts, or care? I would like to see this entry refer to the Duden as a 12-volume German language reference work.

Michael Poplawski (talk) 21:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

op de belastingvrije sommen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.173.5 (talk) 12:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]