Talk:Ich bin ein Berliner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
Contents |
[edit] The phrase and the legend in fiction and popular culture
- In the X-Files episode "Schizogeny", Mulder erroneously tells a teen with the poster "Ich bin ein Auslander" (mistakenly spelled Auslander, correct spelling is Ausländer) that when Kennedy said "Ich bin ein Berliner" he was saying "I am a cocktail sausage", leading to the teen's response: "Who's Kennedy?".
- "Ich Bin Ein Auslander" is also the name of the opening track on the 1994 album Dos Dedos Mis Amigos by UK group Pop Will Eat Itself.
- During a concert in Berlin on November 3, 1996, Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam said to the crowd: "I don't know what to say so I'll just say this, I am a donut."
- British comedian Eddie Izzard talks about John Kennedy's "I am a doughnut" speech in his stand-up act Dress to Kill.
- In Terry Pratchett's book Monstrous Regiment (p. 328 of the hardcover), Samuel Vimes makes a speech in which he says "Ze chzy Brogocia proztfik!", intending this to mean "I am a citizen of Borogravia!". What he actually says is "I am a cherry pancake!".
- The legend also appears in Berlin Game, the first book in Len Deighton's Game, Set, Match trilogy. Deighton describes German cartoonists drawing "talking doughnuts" the next day, but there is no historical evidence for this.
- The short story "Told You So" by Esther M. Friesner in the 1992 alternate-history anthology Alternate Kennedys has Kennedy being granted the ability to have his every utterance become reality and being turned into a jelly donut when he says the famous phrase.
- In an episode of the cartoon Animaniacs a frustrated Abraham Lincoln is trying to prepare the Gettysburg Address, and considers opening with "Ich bin ein Gettysburger."
- According to British comedian Alexei Sayle, prior to the speech Kennedy wrapped himself in black plastic. He then mounted the podium and proclaimed: "Ich bin ein Binliner".
- In an episode of Seinfeld, Jerry makes a reference to the "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech when Elaine displays her interest in JFK Jr. Commentary subtitles to the DVD mistakenly report the "jelly doughnut" legend as fact.
- Artist Achim Mentzel released a CD titled Ich bin ein Berliner with a track of the same name.
- The British band 'Blurt has a song about this called "Bullets For You" on the album with the same title.
- The famous parts of the speech are heavily sampled in the The Passage's song "brd usa ddr jfk" from their 1983 album Enflame.
- In an episode of The Tick, the Tick is sent to Antwerp, Belgium and ends up proclaiming "Ich bin ein Berliner." to a stupefied audience.
- In 1983, then U.S. Vice President George H. W. Bush while visiting Mödlareuth exclaimed, "Ich bin ein Mödlareuther!"[1].
- In episode 7 of Sealab 2021, "Little Orphan Angry", the orphan boy says of Griff's banking scam, "Ich bin impressed!"
- A later episode of Sealab, "Craptastic Voyage", features Tornado Shanks with a tiny submarine in his brain that crashes into his language center. Shanks promptly mutters the line: "Ich bin ein Berliner" to which John F. Kennedy shows up stating: "Hey, hey, that's my line, tumorface!"
- In the book The Year of Secret Assignments, on page 193 & 194, there is a paragraph as follows:
"Well, what happened was, a former president of the United States went to Berlin, Germany, and he shouted at the crowd: 'Ich bin ein Berliner!!' Now, for some reason which I cannot fathom, he was trying to say, 'I am a resident of Berlin!!' (He wasn't.) But, for some reason which I also cannot fathom, he was actually saying: 'I am a jelly doughnut!'
- In an episode of The Simpsons, Simpson Tide, Abraham Simpson recalls the time when he was on the PT 109 with John F. Kennedy and heard him say, "Ich bin ein Berliner". Abe then yells to his shipmates, "He's a Nazi! Get him!" and he and the crew beat him up.
- In an episode of The Simpsons, Burns Verkaufen der Kraftwerk, Mayor Quimby (himself somewhat of a parody of Kennedy) in an effort to welcome German businessmen, says, "Ich bin ein Springfielder!"
- In an episode of The Mask The Animated Series (Flight As A Feather), during a ceremony declaring Barvariaville, a German-themed neighborhood near Edge City, as the exclusive vendor of pretzels for all city functions, Mayor Tilton says, "Ich bin ein Barvariavillian.
- In the film Blades of Glory this phrase can be heard at the beginning of the musical sequence for the double figure skating pair of Stranz Van Waldenberg (dressed as John F. Kennedy) and Fairchild Van Waldenberg (dressed as Marilyn Monroe).
- In separate episodes of The Simpsons, Mayor Quimby states, "Ich bin ein Springfielder," and Grandpa Simpson calls President Kennedy a Nazi when he uses the phrase.
- The English comedian Eddie Izzard references the urban legend in his show 'Dress to Kill'.
[edit] {Sources}
19:39, 9 September 2007 Amcbride (Talk | contribs) (16,739 bytes) (→Jelly doughnut urban legend - {sources} tag: I'm inclined to believe WP here, but currently this section presents 6 sources AGAINST its own thesis and zero for it)
- You should explain that - HERE. Guidod 20:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry; I thought my edit was clear and simple enough that explaining in the edit summary was enough. I don't know if I can elaborate much on my edit summary, but I'll try. WP:V says "any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." In this case, we haven't shown the reader where to find a reliable source that has published the information that the "jelly doughnut" story is an urban legend. This would be a problem by itself, but it is even more of a problem here, because not only have we given no reliable sources to support what the article is saying, we have given six sources that support the opposite of what the article is saying. (Not deceptively; of course... the article correctly makes clear that the sources support the "jelly doughnut" story.) If I thought the article's thesis was false that the doughnut story is an urban legend, I would simply have removed the material as unsourced. But the section is well written and has me reasonably convinced that indeed the doughnut story is just an urban legend. All it lacks are sources. Hence the {{sources}} tag. Does this make sense? Do you have a reliable source for the doughnut story as an urban legend? If not, how would you feel about replacing the {{sources}} tag? --Allen 22:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- No response; restoring {{sources}} tag. --Allen 01:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am not regularly on the English wikipedia of course - as for the jelly doughnut legend to be a myth, well, feel free to read the discussions on this page. And yes, there are indeed about 100 million native German-speakers who will testify that the story is plain wrong - how much more do you need for a reliable fact? Reputable media in Germany will not care about a story that has no meaning in Germany and which is so obviously ridiculous. The interesting thing about the story is that there are those "otherwise reputble media" in the English-speaking world who have cited the myth as if being the truth.... because otherwise it would have not have any factual basis to be worth of being listed in an encyclopedia in the first place (well, perhaps in the trivia section like "note that some hicks in the US believe there was a grammatical error" or something.). Guidod 18:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please do not use derogatory language like "hick" on Wikipedia. We have a policy called WP:CIVIL that basically says to be polite and civil in Wikipedia discussions. As for the issue at hand, perhaps the German Wikipedia is different, but here on the English Wikipedia, we have a policy that says, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." This is the same policy, WP:V, that I cited before. Please read it carefully. It does not matter if the information is true, nor does it matter if 100 million native German speakers agree. All that matters is whether or not the information has been published by a reliable source. I know this can seem counterintuitive at first, but it is a core policy that has served us very well over the years. --Allen 19:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- The highest reliable source for a grammatical thing... that's native speakers. Of course we find that some people do not have "access" to a native speaker to verify what the truth is. But there is an easy way here - just put a {ref}-tag to the published material of proven native speakers. And there is an obvious candidate here - one can find that in en:Talk:Ich bin ein Berliner there are many German native speakers (many of them living in Berlin) telling what the truth is. It is easily verifiable. Any plead to counter that? Guidod 22:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I know that WP:V is kind of long, and I'm sure you're a busy person, but it really would help the discussion if you read it. For example, you would see that our policy is, "Articles and posts on Wikipedia or other open wikis should never be used as third-party sources" (here's a shortcut to the relevant section). So no, we cannot cite the article's own talk page. --Allen 00:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Shall I put a message on my university homepage? As a native speaker and Berlin resident I am obvouisly an expert in the field. Guidod 20:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- I know that WP:V is kind of long, and I'm sure you're a busy person, but it really would help the discussion if you read it. For example, you would see that our policy is, "Articles and posts on Wikipedia or other open wikis should never be used as third-party sources" (here's a shortcut to the relevant section). So no, we cannot cite the article's own talk page. --Allen 00:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- The highest reliable source for a grammatical thing... that's native speakers. Of course we find that some people do not have "access" to a native speaker to verify what the truth is. But there is an easy way here - just put a {ref}-tag to the published material of proven native speakers. And there is an obvious candidate here - one can find that in en:Talk:Ich bin ein Berliner there are many German native speakers (many of them living in Berlin) telling what the truth is. It is easily verifiable. Any plead to counter that? Guidod 22:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please do not use derogatory language like "hick" on Wikipedia. We have a policy called WP:CIVIL that basically says to be polite and civil in Wikipedia discussions. As for the issue at hand, perhaps the German Wikipedia is different, but here on the English Wikipedia, we have a policy that says, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." This is the same policy, WP:V, that I cited before. Please read it carefully. It does not matter if the information is true, nor does it matter if 100 million native German speakers agree. All that matters is whether or not the information has been published by a reliable source. I know this can seem counterintuitive at first, but it is a core policy that has served us very well over the years. --Allen 19:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am not regularly on the English wikipedia of course - as for the jelly doughnut legend to be a myth, well, feel free to read the discussions on this page. And yes, there are indeed about 100 million native German-speakers who will testify that the story is plain wrong - how much more do you need for a reliable fact? Reputable media in Germany will not care about a story that has no meaning in Germany and which is so obviously ridiculous. The interesting thing about the story is that there are those "otherwise reputble media" in the English-speaking world who have cited the myth as if being the truth.... because otherwise it would have not have any factual basis to be worth of being listed in an encyclopedia in the first place (well, perhaps in the trivia section like "note that some hicks in the US believe there was a grammatical error" or something.). Guidod 18:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- No response; restoring {{sources}} tag. --Allen 01:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry; I thought my edit was clear and simple enough that explaining in the edit summary was enough. I don't know if I can elaborate much on my edit summary, but I'll try. WP:V says "any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." In this case, we haven't shown the reader where to find a reliable source that has published the information that the "jelly doughnut" story is an urban legend. This would be a problem by itself, but it is even more of a problem here, because not only have we given no reliable sources to support what the article is saying, we have given six sources that support the opposite of what the article is saying. (Not deceptively; of course... the article correctly makes clear that the sources support the "jelly doughnut" story.) If I thought the article's thesis was false that the doughnut story is an urban legend, I would simply have removed the material as unsourced. But the section is well written and has me reasonably convinced that indeed the doughnut story is just an urban legend. All it lacks are sources. Hence the {{sources}} tag. Does this make sense? Do you have a reliable source for the doughnut story as an urban legend? If not, how would you feel about replacing the {{sources}} tag? --Allen 22:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Neither being a native German speaker nor being a Berlin resident makes you an expert in the question of the urban legend's status in Germany. That said, it is impossible to prove a negative, and probably impossible to find a source to back up a negative claim like "the urban legend is (virtually) unknown in Germany". The statement should simply be removed unless such a source actually does exist. —Angr 20:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- [response to Guidod:] What you suggest might or might not work. You're right that there is something special about self-published work by experts that can make it an exception to the no-self-published-sources rule. Here is the relevant bit of policy (yet again, from WP:V):
-
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.
- So if you have had work regarding the German language published by reliable third-party publications, then you can post something on your university homepage, and we can probably cite it on Wikipedia. --Allen 02:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- [to Angr] Thanks, but what about the basic issue of saying that the doughnut story is an urban legend, regardless of whether or not it's well known in Germany? --Allen 03:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh c'mon, you're taking the fun out of this where one would discuss reliability ouf sources - because every single of those references citing the myth as truth is obviously and by all logic less valuable than any single native speaker. Because they had forgotten to do the minimal original research that is all about good journalism. Even the reference to the word.com part does not show the slightest idea in the article of having any foundation for its claims. They just say so. (and to speak of cultural difference: sure, Aufklärung demands that authority is mainly drawn from proper reasoning in looking at the value of the text - its publisher is a secondary attribution. Yeah, even Science mags have bad days). Well anyway, if you feel fine with the current construction then so be it.
Going for "where is it known", well, the English wikipedia article has killed off already the reference that the origin of the popular myth is in the USA. The German wikipedia page still has it and it says frankly that it a US-centric phenomenon. And so far not a single reader had questioned that on de:Diskussion:Ich bin ein Berliner as "oh, I knew it already". May be you want to try google looking for German-speaking webpages - I assume that every single of them will say (a) it is a myth and (b) popular in the USA. (Unless they make out for a good satire anyway as the legend feels so ridiculous to a native speaker). If you have too much time then go looking and show me some counter example. What shall the ratio be for virtually unknown, 100:1 or 10000000:1 ? I can throw in some hundred people that I know personally around - whom can you account for as a counter example? Guidod 00:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't speak German, so I can't go looking on German-language webpages, but it is acceptable (not preferred, but acceptable) to cite German-language sources on the English Wikipedia, so feel free to add citations to published, third-party sources written in German. And I agree that word.com is not a great source. The about.com article is a lot better in this case, even though I'm not so sure about about.com overall. Your other arguments about published sources vs. the word of individuals with direct experience are better suited, I think, for Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability. They go to the heart of what Wikipedia is supposed to be, and if you successfully convinced the community to change its policy, this article is just one of thousands that would be dramatically affected. --Allen 17:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Don't forget that the primary source is linked for all to review for themselves, namely, Kennedy's speech itself. Leaving aside the other fallacies (a Berliner is not the name of a doughnut in Berlin, there is no grammatical mistake), it can be seen that people do not, in fact, burst out laughing at the phrase when he utters it, as the legend asserts. ProhibitOnions (T) 17:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- @Allen, actually I was thinking that one could use the google translator to get the basic ideas out of a webpage. It's not a perfect tool but for the target snippets it should be all sufficient. - As for Talk:Verifiability, well, I don't have the time to set out on crusade to persuade people to what I believe should be common sense in the first place. If it is disputed anyway then my English level might hit the limits, for example, does "pristine sources" have the indented associations that I am thinking of? Guidod 01:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I have now supplied sources for several of the apparently contentious statements about the urban legend of the jelly doughnut. These sources, all of which are in German, clearly state that the type of jelly doughnut in question is called a Pfannkuchen in Berlin, that the urban legend prevalent in English-speaking countries is incorrect, and that the Kennedy speech was one of the great and celebrated moments in German post-war history. Not many English-language sources debunk this silly myth. One reason is the urban legend itself, another is the tremendous admiration and affection that most Germans, across the political spectrum, felt and continue to feel for Kennedy and his courageous speech. Being German and having lived in Germany from birth until age 24, I can certainly personally attest to those feelings of Germans about the speech. Perhaps for this reason Germans are not inclined to make fun of it. A U.S. analogue would be the Gettysburg Address. Substantively, the urban legend is utter and complete nonsense. I know from personal experience that many U.S. citizens find this hard to believe (some of the comments on this page seem to reflect a certain resistance to letting go of the legend). Nevertheless, it's true. I am very glad that this article sets the record straight.Paradisewithinthee 22:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- References like stadtkind.com or esskultur.net are nothing better than linking to my own homepage with a hasty remark. Your statement however highlights a fact that many of the English-speaking readers do not pay enough attention to: the actual affection of Germans towards the speech and its catch phrase. The JFK "Ich bin ein Berliner" snippet from the original tape is included quite often in contemporary media, TV and radio broadcasts - atleast around August 13 each year. These references are done always in a very dignified manner - so there you are how the public opinion comes about in Germany. Guidod 01:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Guidod, thanks for the suggestion of using Google translation; I hadn't thought of that. Actually it generates some reverse "Berliner" humor, because it always translates "Berliner" as "citizen of Berlin", even when the jelly doughnut is intended. And Paradisewithinthee, thanks for adding the sources. I agree with Guidod that some of them are no better than linking to Guidod's homepage, but I'm not going to worry about it anymore. It's better than no sources at all. And I won't protest if anyone wants to add the about.com reference in; I might do it myself if I get around to it. I can barely remember what it is I have against that website anyway. --Allen 01:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- William Grimes's June 6, 2007, review in the New York Times of Frederick Taylor's new book, The Berlin Wall: a World divided, 1961-1989, states that Taylor debunks the doughnut myth along the lines discussed here. Grimes wries, " . . . John F. Kennedy’s ringing declaration “Ich bin ein Berliner” (which, as Mr. Taylor carefully explains, does not mean “I am a jelly doughnut,” despite the myth) . . . " I believe that citing to the review is not appropriate, and any cites have to be to the book itself. I haven't seen it, but I'll try to get a hold of it and supply the citation.12.2.26.161 15:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Guidod, thanks for the suggestion of using Google translation; I hadn't thought of that. Actually it generates some reverse "Berliner" humor, because it always translates "Berliner" as "citizen of Berlin", even when the jelly doughnut is intended. And Paradisewithinthee, thanks for adding the sources. I agree with Guidod that some of them are no better than linking to Guidod's homepage, but I'm not going to worry about it anymore. It's better than no sources at all. And I won't protest if anyone wants to add the about.com reference in; I might do it myself if I get around to it. I can barely remember what it is I have against that website anyway. --Allen 01:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- While I agree that it's an urban legend, it's no urban legend which had never been known in Germany. No doubt, nobody in Berlin or watching this speech on TV - even if he calls jelly doughnuts "Berliner" - would have misunderstood that phrase. However, because of his little pause in that sentence it is a natural joke. I'm sure that many people realized the existence of this second interpretation and that it was a frequently told joke. Probably I'm wrong, but I "remember" that I misunderstood that sentence when I first heard it. Consider a child of seven or eight years who knows jelly doughnuts but is too young to know anything about Berlin, the Cold War and why his parents are afraid of some words. 84.178.88.165 18:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- FellGleaming (talk) 17:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Regarding the so-called "myth", I'm inclined to believe there is a bit more to it. This interview with a native of Berlin who actually heard Kennedy's speech said his phrase was "a bit silly" and specifically makes the "pancake" reference: http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=urbanlegends&cdn=newsissues&tm=103&gps=147_1123_1588_992&f=20&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/09/interviews/hosseini/.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- This source, from a native German translator, says the phrasing is indeed closer to a "jelly doughnut" than a person, but claims the distinction was probably not enough to make the average person laugh: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/MegaBBS/thread-view.asp?threadid=1636.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Also, despite Kennedy's so-called professional translator, the fact remains that he (Robert Lochner) was not a German native-language speaker. The source article's conclusion that he couldn't have possibly made a mistake due to his "professional" status seems rather weak.
-
-
-
[edit] General Clay
Kennedy says, "And I am proud to ... come here in the company of my fellow American, General Clay, who has been in this city during its great moments of crisis and will come again if ever needed." Does anyone know who is this General Clay? --Acepectif 09:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- That would be Lucius D. Clay. —Angr 10:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ich / Ick
If I remember correctly, a Berliner would say "Ick bin ein Berliner"? A somewhat reliable source: the "Ick bin ein Amerikaner" T-shirts on http://usa.usembassy.de/gemeinsam/05.htm. Erik Warmelink (talk) 00:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- It's true that the word for "I" in Berlin dialect is ick, not ich. However, I suspect those T-shirts are more a teasing reference to Americans' inability to pronounce the sound [ç] than a reference to Berlin dialect. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 08:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Possibly, on the other hand, teasing Americans was not the goal of the Solidaritätskundgebung am Brandenburger Tor. Both the US embassy and the BPA (which I guess is the de:Bundespresseamt) could have chosen better pictures to show the solidarity.
- I had two reasons to mention it:
- If I remember correctly again, a Berliner says machen, not maken, which would put Berlin north of the Benrath line, yet south of the Uerdingen line.
- It is the only story somewhat close to the "jelly doughnut" myth that I had heard before reading about it on wikipedia (but then again, it was only mentioned when talking about the differences between Berlinerish and High German).
- Googling for "Ick bin ein Berliner" (with the quotes) only gave links to blogs when I first read the article. When I found a (hardly) better source, I decided to ask on the talk page. Erik Warmelink (talk) 22:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- "Ick bin ein Berliner" would be half dialect, half Hochdeutsch. A dialect speaking Berlin citizen would say "Ick bin een Berlina". Therefor I agree with the assumption above, it's most likely mocking "American German". Sneeka2 (talk) 05:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sources don't back up statement.
I removed "Although it has no basis in fact, the legend has since been repeated by reputable media, such as the BBC[8], The Guardian[9], MSNBC[10], CNN[11], Time magazine[12], and in several books about Germany written by English-speaking authors, including Norman Davies[13]." If you follow those links, you will not find any mention of President Kennedy or jelly doughnuts. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, and I really don't mean to be rude, but did you even pay attention to the links? The footnoted links do mention Kennedy and jelly doughnuts. It is a little above halfway down in the BBC link, and at the very bottom on the CNN link. Watch the movie on the MSNBC link. It clearly provides the incorrect translation almost halfway through. Comments by random people below it are both right and wrong. The third paragraph in the Time article mentions the myth without expanation. The Guardian article, however does say that the myth is false. I will be reinstating the section without the Guardian. I do not know about the book. Regards, Reywas92Talk 03:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Reywas's reversion restored some OR that I had previously removed, and deleted quotation marks that were quite proper. I have reverted to a previous version of the article. Robert K S (talk) 03:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I sit corrected. I took out the internal links (which I had assumed were the proper sources) and hope they will stay out, since they confuse the reader and are really not necessary. Anybody who reads this article should already know these news organisations. Mea culpa. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 07:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
"In fact, the statement is both grammatically correct[3] and perfectly idiomatic, and cannot be misunderstood in context." It's not a fact. The fact is that it has been misunderstood in context. Otherwise, this whole argument would not be here.157.127.124.14 (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not quite. It has been misunderstood by Americans. The fact the the speech was given in berlin, and the myth is not even known of by most Germans seems to indicatate that it can't be misunderstood in context. It CAN be misunderstood perhaps if you misunderstand the context.--66.153.117.118 (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Not an urban legend
He actually said I am a jelly dough nut. Ich bin Berliner is the correct phrase. this needs to be redone... after discussion of course. At the very least we have to present this neutral as well as the parenthetical translation needs to be correct. Superbowlbound (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- It had been discussed, see archives. You presented no new argument for an appeal. Note that you have to persuade a jury of a dozen Berlin residents that watch this page, so chances are verrry low. Guidod (talk) 01:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
It could just as easily be claimed that someone saying "I am a New Yorker." was calling themself a magazine. So no, he was not calling himself a jelly donut. 70.49.90.14 (talk) 05:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- On a similar note, Time makes fools of us all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.153.117.118 (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
actually saying "ich bin ein Berliner" sounds stronger in a speech than just saying "Ich bin Berliner", although it might be gramatically wrong. For the average german speaker this only adds the double meaning of doughnut/citizen from berlin, so unless you are higly educated in german language you would not waste your brainpower on thinking about what is correct, so there is no such urban legend in german speaking countrys. I sometimes joke about kennedy being a doughnut because were i come from these doughnut are called berliners, but if you walk into a bakery in berlin and ask for a "berliner", there is a good chance they have no idea what you are talking about, as they are called "pfannkuchen" here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.188.160.153 (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Moved from the article
- In 2007 Mongolia released a new 'talking' coin with JFK on the obverse which speaks the phrase "Ich bin ein Berliner". Source Times Online
silly rabbit (talk) 11:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
User:Joe Chop
[edit] Doughnut Calling
Is there still a debate on this? i gather it is understood now that Kennedy called himself a doughnut, and the point made above under "Not an urban legend" is poignant: if i say to an English speaker, "i am a Danish" i will be taken for a visitor from slightly north of Germany, and naturally not for an iced pastry with apricot jelly in the middle. But the comparison is perfect, thus the grins on the faces of the crowd filmed during the speech. He could have spoken in Hamburg without disastrous effects and resulting debate, as a "hamburger" is just another pure American fiction (as are frankfurters, also a kind of comminuted retrieved-meat product). Still: nobody so far has been recorded entering a German baker's asking for a Kennedy - perhaps it's time.
Joe Chop 'addendum': i see this debate is predicated on verifiable information/reliable sources etc. - may i point out that the only reliable source is the footage available; if you are not thoroughly conversant in German or think you must somehow defend a Nation's "honour" at any price then you are obfuscating the debate. Also: with regard to the New Yorker magazine comparison, it would be accurate to suppose the talker referred to themselves as The New Yorker -- And apologies to the Moderator, but in the summation box heading this debate, the first four points are either innacurate or ill informed. ..."infinitely unlikely" etc. i perceive as well, this is hardly edifying - the future of Debate looks grim. i don't need to consult a dozen Berlin residents btw, i am German. unsigned comment added by Joe Chop (talk • contribs) 16:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] I agree with the urban legend section, but...
I don't think it is being completely fair to say that it has NO basis in fact. The article admits that there is a pastry called a Berliner and it is known in many parts of Germany as that. The understanding of the German language and the Berlin dialect are what is wrong with the urban legend. Maybe I am being nit-picky, and I realize that myths have to be treated carefully, but a kernel of truth doesn't equal "no basis in fact" no matter how wrong something is.--66.153.117.118 (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree here; the phrase "no basis in fact" suggests to me that the article is getting defensive of JFK. The article itself mentions that in stating one's place of origin it is typical to omit the indefinite article in German; is that not a basis in fact, even if the conclusion is incorrect? --146.201.154.162 (talk) 05:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, the user who reverted the article after I removed the phrase cited as his reason "until myths become facts, it has no basis in fact." Such an argument is completely invalid; nearly all myths have some basis in fact. I believe such a statement is both a misunderstanding of what a myth is (and truly, this "urban legend" is not even a myth) and a misunderstanding of what a basis in fact is. To state that a story has no basis in fact is quite different from stating that it is untrue. I don't want to start an edit war here, but the article should not have been reverted.--146.201.154.162 (talk) 05:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe the edit I just made created a more accurate phrasing; it is a fact that in parts of Germany there is a pastry called a Berliner, so the legend has a basis in some kind of fact, no matter how erroneously interpreted.--SockEat (talk) 03:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
actually saying "ich bin ein Berliner" sounds stronger in a speech than just saying "Ich bin Berliner", although it might be gramatically wrong. For the average german speaker this only adds the double meaning of doughnut/citizen from berlin, so unless you are higly educated in german language you would not waste your brainpower on thinking about what is correct, so there is no such urban legend in german speaking countrys. I sometimes joke about kennedy being a doughnut because were i come from these doughnut are called berliners, but if you walk into a bakery in berlin and ask for a "berliner", there is a good chance they have no idea what you are talking about, as they are called "pfannkuchen" here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.188.160.153 (talk) 18:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)