Does it need any reason for teatime? (English OT - the first chapter)

[CT]

but seriously, the city is very beautiful, if it's not raining

...

It always rains in London. Well, at least it is always very foggy. (If there is anything we have learned from Edgar Wallace movies, it is the fact that the streets in London are basically impassable at night due to the absurd amount of misty fog that covers the pavement. And that every Kinski movie is an instant classic, of course. )

Anyway, does anyone know what Pro-Seminar I should take in the upcoming semester? I do not need to take an Einführungsveranstaltung, so I am pretty much free to choose the branch, but all those courses sound amazingly boring. >_>

[Mister Brightside]

There are no boring courses.

[Gonzo]

Main points I and II sound pretty interessting. I would choose point number I (Literatur und Literaturwissenschaft) because I'm interessted in american literature. And cause I'm a little fan of the american history (I don't know why...) I would choose american history and society, too.

But basically it's your decision...

[Mister Brightside]

And cause I'm a little fan of the american history (I don't know why...)

...

Maybe because you don't need to remember too many things? ^^

[Gonzo]

Maybe because you don't need to remember too many things? ^^

...

How do you mean that? o.Ô

Hm, maybe because of the civil war. That wasn't a fight for oil, money or power but for human rights like freedom in first case. I don't have in mind the things that stands behind this motivations.

[Mister Brightside]

How do you mean that? o.Ô

Hm, maybe because of the civil war. That wasn't a fight for oil, money or power but for human rights like freedom in first case. I don't have in mind the things that stands behind this motivations.

...

Well, American history is kind of short, because the USA are pretty young. That's why I said you wouldn't have to remember too many things. It was not an incredibly funny joke though, I know.

To declare the civil war generally as a fight for human rights is somehow strange, because it was not all about that. In the first case, I guess, it was all about might... In my opinion it was a struggle for influence on the new states joining the USA in the wild west. It was not merely about slaving, but making all new states slave-free was an open declaration of northern supremacy. That was something the southern states could not tolerate.

Concernig my statement I have to say, that one may have a lot to memorize in american history just because it is a young history. In American history we know more details than in f.e. Phrygian history. You may have to know which division was led by who on what day of what battle in the civil war. Although I find history passionate and exciting it was at that point I quitted the course completely. There is nothing more boring than abstract categorisation.

Last thing to note: if you don't share my opinion on the afore mentioned points let's have an argument about it. I guess people wouldn't want us to discuss here, but we could open an english 'anglo-historic thread'.
Guess I'm dreaming again...

[Gonzo]

In my opinion it was a struggle for influence on the new states joining the USA in the wild west. It was not merely about slaving, but making all new states slave-free was an open declaration of northern supremacy. That was something the southern states could not tolerate.

...

And because ot that it was a war for human rights. Making the southern states slave-free, that's fighting for freedom.

You're right, the American history is pretty young compared to our european. So their history is shorter then many other.

Last thing to note: if you don't share my opinion on the afore mentioned points let's have an argument about it. I guess people wouldn't want us to discuss here, but we could open an english 'anglo-historic thread'.
Guess I'm dreaming again...

...

Hm, i guess my english-skills aren't good enough to argue at a high level. T_T

[Jinjukei]

OT:
Ahhh, got a question. What's if smeone ask you (in real life) "how are you?" an the beginning of the conversation. Is it the companion piece to "Wie geht's?" in german? So it's a rhetorical question?
pls reply fast

[CT]

Yes, it is. Even more than in German. Just reply with the same expression ("how are you") and never ever answer the question itself.

[Jinjukei]

Ok, thank you Mr. CT Sometimes i replied the question but never knew how to do it exactly ... But whatever, now it make sense ...

[Krelian]

Yes, it is. Even more than in German. Just reply with the same expression ("how are you") and never ever answer the question itself.

...

Are you sure you're not confusing the phrase with "How do you do"?. As far as I know, answering "how are you" with the exact same expression is not costumary. Instead, just say "fine" or "good" or something similar. Of course you can still answer in return after that, e.g.:
"How are you?"
"I'm fine. How are you?"

"How do you do" though is never to be answered with anything else than "how do you do". It's also mostly used in the business sector, when you meet someone for the first time.

[CT]

Well, of course it is up to you to optionally answer "how are you?" with something like "fine", "good" etc. But it is also quite important to reply with "how are you?", since it would be very impolite if you did not. And, honestly, no one really wants to know about your mood and health; unless it is a friend or relative who asks this, the question is almost always rhetorical.

"How do you do?" is basically the same question as "How are you?". It might be even more superficial, though.

[Krelian]

I agree that it's usually not about how you really are. You're not supposed to answer in great detail how your life has been since the last time you met the person asking the question. That's why I said a common response would be "fine". However, you're wrong in saying that it's the same as "how do you do". It is absolutely not! You say "how do you do" once, and only once you meet a person for the first time. But it's going out of fashion to use that expression at all, according to my former (British native) English teacher.

As to whether or not to reply with "how are you", I'm not sure about that, but you're probably right that it would be impolite not to do it.

[Wonderwanda]

Literature. At least the literature-courses are the only ones I really enjoy participating in. It's not as hella boring as linguistics and -well- history isn't my thing. If it's yours, choose that one.

But, just so you know, literature-courses aren't all about reading hundreds of pages everyday. You don't necessarily read more than in any other course because you learn a lot about the theory (interpretation, historical background, genres...) -- the "Einführungskurse" with their tutorials are much more strenuous.

I chose "English Linguistics", "Introduction to American/English Literature" and "Introduction to English drama" for my studies. The first two are Einführungskurse (and I have an Einführungskurs for German studies as well, "Neuere Literaturwissenschaft") and they really take my time. The last one is a Proseminar I and I really enjoy it. Laziness prevails!