was doch erst Theorien gibt

Löwenfrau

Senior Member
Brazilian Portuguese
I'm not sure how to read this, in the following context:

"Denn wir werden gleich sehen, daß physikalische Theorien, sowie man über die Beschreibung hinauskommen will (was doch erst Theorien gibt), ja sogar schon in statu nascendi der Beschreibung, von der Sprache, von der Gemeinsprache abhängig sind."

".... as soon as one wants to go beyond the description (which alone produces theories)..."? Meaning that who wants to go beyond the description doesn't realize that only descriptions can amount to theories? There is something wrong in my reading, I feel.
 
  • bearded

    Senior Member
    ''Which alone produces theories'':tick:
    But in my opinion, ''which'' does not refer to ''description/Beschreibung'', as is shown by the neuter ''was'', but to the whole 'hinauskommen' phrase:
    As soon as one wants to go beyond description, (which (=and this) is the only procedure that produces theories)..
    The only way to produce theories is when you go beyond the description.
     
    Last edited:

    Löwenfrau

    Senior Member
    Brazilian Portuguese
    ''Which alone produces theories'':tick:
    But in my opinion, ''which'' does not refer to ''description/Beschreibung'', as is shown by the neuter ''was'', but to the whole 'hinauskommen' phrase:
    As soon as one wants to go beyond description, (which (=and this) is the only procedure that produces theories)..
    The only way to produce theories is when you go beyond the description.
    Now that you said, of course, it makes more sense. What made me think that "was" referred to ""Beschreibung" was "doch". I was reading "doch" as the afirmation of something unlikely.
     

    bearded

    Senior Member
    In my opinion, that ''doch'' is very similar to a ''ja'' or an ''eigentlich'', and could be rendered as 'actually'. I think it is a kind of reply to an objection - not expressed - in the mind of the author, or to a possible objection by others.
     
    Last edited:

    Löwenfrau

    Senior Member
    Brazilian Portuguese
    In my opinion, that ''doch'' is very similar to a ''ja'' or an ''eigentlich'', and could be rendered as 'actually'. I think it is a kind of reply to an objection - not expressed - in the mind of the author, or to a possible objection by others.
    Maybe "indeed" could also work?
     

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    which alone produces theories)..."?
    You read the "erst" wrong. It indicates a necessarily condition:
    "which [=the going beyond mere description] is necessary to produce theories". In other words: you have go beyond mere description to arrive at theories.
     

    Löwenfrau

    Senior Member
    Brazilian Portuguese
    You read the "erst" wrong. It indicates a necessarily condition:
    "which [=the going beyond mere description] is necessary to produce theories". In other words: you have go beyond mere description to arrive at theories.
    ^
    "Alone" is a necessary condition, but not enough, right? I was reading it as meaning a sufficient condition. According to what you say, it could be rephrased: "without which one does not arrive at theories"
     

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    it could be rephrased: "without which one does not arrive at theories"
    Yes. More precisely: erst means not before. I.e the whole clause means which is the final step that creates theories. I.e. it is not a sufficient condition but a necessary one in the sense that it has to be added to everything to produce a theory.
     

    Löwenfrau

    Senior Member
    Brazilian Portuguese
    Yes. More precisely: erst means not before. I.e the whole clause means which is the final step that creates theories. I.e. it is not a sufficient condition but a necessary one in the sense that it has to be added to everything to produce a theory.
    :thumbsup:
    Danke schön!
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top