Korpus, Wörterbuch und Sprachgefühl
Chapter Overview and Objectives
Chapter 16 opens Unit IV and turns from mediation toward precision. Tobias has started noticing that his German is fluent but occasionally slightly "off" — a word that is technically correct but not quite what a native editor would choose, a collocation that sounds translated rather than natural. This chapter introduces the intelligent use of dictionaries, corpora, and reference tools: not as a substitute for judgment, but as evidence that supports it. Learners will practice reading dictionary entries and usage notes closely, distinguishing reliable frequency impressions from guesswork, analyzing collocations, and writing a short usage note that is grounded in reference evidence rather than intuition alone. No new grammar system is activated; the chapter instead builds a research habit that will support the precision-focused chapters ahead.
By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:
- Read a dictionary or usage-note entry and identify its register, collocation, and usage information.
- Distinguish a well-supported usage claim from an unverified guess or overgeneralization.
- Compare two near-synonyms using collocation and register evidence rather than intuition alone.
- Revise a sentence that sounds unnatural or translated, using reference evidence to justify the change.
- Write a short usage note that documents a word choice for another learner or colleague.
- Explain, in speech, why one word choice fits a context better than another, citing evidence rather than asserting a preference.
Opening Scenario
A colleague, Herr Böhm, is reviewing a document Tobias drafted and stops on one sentence. "You wrote 'wir haben das Problem gemacht'," he says, "but nobody would really say that. We'd say 'ein Problem verursachen' or 'ein Problem schaffen.' Can you check why, and note it somewhere so the next person doesn't repeat it?" Tobias realizes he chose machen because it felt like the safest, most general verb — a common habit for learners moving a verb like "make" directly from English. Rather than guessing at a fix, he decides to look up how Problem actually collocates with verbs in current usage, compare a few near-synonyms, and write a short usage note explaining the more natural choice and why.
- Identify why "das Problem machen" sounds unnatural, even though it is grammatically well formed.
- Compare the collocational behavior of machen, verursachen, and schaffen with the noun Problem.
- Consult a dictionary or usage reference to support the comparison rather than relying on impression alone.
- Write a short usage note documenting the more natural choice for future reference.
Core Vocabulary: Dictionaries, Corpora, Usage
This chapter activates vocabulary for talking about reference tools and word-level precision. These items are introduced for productive use in describing and justifying word choices.
Nachschlagewerke — Reference Tools
- das Wörterbuch, die Wörterbücher — dictionary
- das Korpus, die Korpora — (text) corpus
- der Beleg, die Belege — attested example, evidence
- nachschlagen — to look up (a word, a reference)
- die Quellenlage — state of the available sources/evidence
Wortgebrauch — Word Usage
- die Kollokation, die Kollokationen — collocation
- die Valenz — valency (a verb's argument pattern)
- das Synonym, die Synonyme — synonym
- gebräuchlich — commonly used, in current use
- ungewöhnlich klingen — to sound unusual
- der Sprachgebrauch — language usage, usage patterns
The verbs verursachen and schaffen are treated here as review items from Volume III and IV vocabulary; their collocation behavior with Problem is the new productive focus of this chapter.
Delivery Focus: Reading Reference Entries Aloud
Dictionary and usage-note entries are often dense: abbreviations, example sentences, and labels packed into a small space. When reading such an entry aloud — for example, to explain a usage point to a colleague — slow down at abbreviations and labels rather than rushing past them, and pause briefly between the headword, the label, and the example sentence so a listener can follow the structure. This is a delivery skill, not a new pronunciation system: it reuses the intelligibility and pacing practices already established in earlier chapters.
When citing an example sentence from a reference source aloud, mark clearly where the citation begins and ends, for instance by saying "zum Beispiel..." before the example and pausing afterward, so the listener does not mistake the cited example for your own claim.
Language Patterns: Collocation, Valency, and Usage Labels
This chapter does not introduce a new grammar system. It introduces a way of talking about word behavior: collocation, valency, and lexicographic labels. These patterns support the precision work of the rest of Unit IV.
Describing a Collocation
Citing Evidence Without Fabricating Numbers
When describing how common a word or collocation is, use qualitative language such as häufig (frequently), gelegentlich (occasionally), selten (rarely), or eher ungewöhnlich (rather unusual) rather than inventing specific statistics. A usage note should describe what a dictionary, corpus, or other reference tool actually shows, or state clearly that the judgment is based on general impression when no reference has been consulted. Do not present an invented frequency count or an unverified percentage as if it were attested evidence.
Reading a Valency Pattern
A dictionary or usage reference often lists a verb's valency: which case its objects take, which prepositions it governs, and what kind of subject or object it typically combines with. For example, an entry for verursachen typically shows an accusative object (etwas verursachen) and lists typical objects such as Schaden, Probleme, or Verzögerungen. Reading this information carefully, rather than assuming a verb behaves like its English translation, is the core skill of this chapter.
Model Text: A Question About a Word
A short original exchange between Herr Böhm and Tobias, written for this course, establishing the chapter's task.
This exchange sets up the chapter's writing task. The reference entries Tobias consults appear in the Reading Practice section below.
Guided Practice
- Explain, in your own words, why "das Problem machen" sounds unnatural even though it is grammatically correct.
- List two verbs that collocate naturally with Problem and one sample sentence for each.
- Practice describing a collocation using the pattern "X kollokiert mit Y" or "X passt gut zu Y."
- Practice describing frequency using qualitative language (häufig, gelegentlich, selten) rather than invented statistics.
- Identify one word in your own recent writing that might be a direct, unchecked transfer from English, and note what you would look up to check it.
Listening Practice
Ask a partner, instructor, or text-to-speech tool to read the following short passage aloud. Listen twice before answering.
Ein kurzes Gespräch über Wortwahl — Listening Script
Wenn man eine Fremdsprache auf hohem Niveau benutzt, merkt man oft nicht sofort, wenn ein Wort zwar richtig, aber nicht ganz natürlich ist. Ein Wörterbuch allein reicht dabei manchmal nicht aus, weil es selten zeigt, wie ein Wort tatsächlich mit anderen Wörtern kombiniert wird. Ein Korpus kann hier helfen, denn es zeigt echte Beispiele aus echten Texten. Trotzdem sollte man vorsichtig sein: Nicht jede Kombination, die im Korpus vorkommt, ist automatisch die beste Wahl für jeden Kontext. Am Ende bleibt die eigene Sprachkompetenz entscheidend — die Werkzeuge unterstützen das Urteil, sie ersetzen es nicht.
Verständnisfragen
1. According to the passage, why is a dictionary sometimes not enough on its own?
2. What can a corpus show that a dictionary might not?
3. Warum sollte man laut dem Text trotzdem vorsichtig mit Korpusbeispielen sein?
Speaking Practice: Defending a Word Choice
Aufgabe: Wortwahl begründen
Working with a partner or by recording yourself, choose one pair of near-synonyms (for example, verursachen vs. machen, or another pair supplied by your instructor) and explain, in a short spoken exchange, which one fits a given sentence better and why.
Rolle: Vorschlagende Person
- Propose a word choice for a given sentence.
- Explain the reasoning using collocation or valency language from this chapter.
- Avoid stating an invented frequency statistic; use qualitative language instead.
Rolle: Prüfende Person
- Ask why the proposed word fits better than an alternative.
- Ask what evidence (dictionary, corpus, general impression) supports the claim.
- Push back gently if the justification sounds like a guess rather than evidence.
Bewertungshinweise — Speaking Criteria
- Clearly states a word-choice recommendation and a plausible alternative.
- Justifies the choice using collocation or valency reasoning, not intuition alone.
- Avoids fabricated frequency claims; uses qualitative usage language appropriately.
- Responds to follow-up questions about the evidence honestly.
- Maintains clear, appropriately paced delivery, including when citing an example.
Solo alternative: Record yourself explaining your word choice, then listen back and check whether your justification relied on evidence or only on a feeling that one word "sounds better."
Reading Practice: Two Dictionary Entries
verursachen
verursachen (schwaches Verb, trennt sich nicht) — etwas (Akk.) verursachen: dafür sorgen, dass etwas (meist Unerwünschtes) entsteht oder passiert. Typische Objekte: Schaden, Probleme, Verzögerungen, Kosten, Missverständnisse. Register: neutral bis formell; in Berichten, Verträgen und offizieller Korrespondenz gebräuchlich. Beispiel: "Der Sturm hat erhebliche Schäden verursacht."
machen
machen (schwaches Verb) — etwas (Akk.) machen: ein sehr allgemeines Verb für Herstellen, Tun, Erledigen. Typische Objekte: Hausaufgaben, Kaffee, Fotos, Pläne, Fehler. Hinweis: Bei abstrakten negativen Ereignissen wie "Problem" oder "Schaden" wird "machen" seltener verwendet als spezifischere Verben wie "verursachen" oder "anrichten"; die Kombination kann in formellen Texten ungewöhnlich wirken.
Verständnisfragen
1. According to the entry for verursachen, what kind of objects does it typically take?
2. Welches Register wird für "verursachen" laut dem Eintrag angegeben?
3. What does the entry for machen explicitly say about combining it with words like Problem or Schaden?
4. Based on both entries, which verb would you now recommend to Herr Böhm, and why?
Writing Workshop: A Usage Note
Produce a short written usage note, based on the two dictionary entries above, that documents the more natural word choice for future reference.
Aufgabe — Task
Verfassen Sie eine kurze Gebrauchsnotiz (ungefähr 80 bis 120 Wörter) für Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Erklären Sie, warum "das Problem verursachen" natürlicher klingt als "das Problem machen", und stützen Sie Ihre Erklärung auf die Wörterbucheinträge oben. Vermeiden Sie erfundene Häufigkeitsangaben; benutzen Sie stattdessen qualitative Formulierungen.
Stilistische Ziele — Stylistic Goals
- Beleggestützt: ground the recommendation in the reference entries rather than personal preference alone.
- Präzision: name the specific collocation pattern that supports the recommendation.
- Zurückhaltung: avoid overstating certainty; use qualitative usage language.
- Reread both dictionary entries and note what each one actually says about collocation and register.
- Decide which word to recommend and identify the specific evidence that supports it.
- Draft a short usage note explaining the recommendation for a colleague.
- Check the draft for any invented frequency claim and replace it with qualitative language if needed.
- Add one corrected example sentence showing the recommended word in context.
- Revise for clarity and conciseness.
Revision checklist:
- Does the note clearly recommend one word choice over the other?
- Is the recommendation supported by the dictionary entries rather than by unverified impression alone?
- Does the note avoid fabricated frequency statistics?
- Does the note include at least one corrected example sentence?
- Is German spelling, capitalization, and punctuation accurate throughout?
Culture and Communication
Dictionaries, corpora, and usage references are valuable because they show real, attested language rather than a single speaker's impression. But no tool automatically knows the right register, audience, or purpose for a given text. A learner who mechanically follows the first example found in a corpus, without judging whether it fits the current context, can end up with a technically attested but poorly chosen phrase. The skill this chapter builds is not "look it up" alone, but "look it up, and then judge whether it fits."
Some dictionaries and corpora are built primarily from Germany-based sources; others include Austrian and Swiss material more thoroughly. A usage note that draws only on one national source should say so, rather than presenting a Germany-based judgment as automatically valid for all DACH contexts. This continues the labeling habit built in Chapter 14: variation is not an error, and its source should be named.
Common Mistakes to Recheck
Error: A learner defaults to a very general verb such as machen for abstract negative outcomes, assuming it is always an acceptable, neutral choice.
Correction: Check the noun's typical collocating verbs (ein Problem verursachen, einen Fehler machen, einen Schaden anrichten) rather than defaulting to one general verb everywhere.
Error: A learner writes that a word is used "in 80 percent of cases" without having consulted any actual reference source.
Correction: Use qualitative language such as häufig or selten, or state plainly that the judgment is a general impression rather than a measured statistic.
Error: A learner copies the first example sentence found in a corpus search into a formal document, without checking whether its register matches the document.
Correction: Check the register and context of any reference example before reusing it, and adapt it if necessary rather than pasting it unchanged.
Chapter Summary
Chapter 16 opened Unit IV by introducing the intelligent use of dictionaries, corpora, and reference tools to evaluate collocation, valency, and register. Learners compared near-synonyms using reference evidence rather than intuition, practiced describing usage patterns with qualitative rather than fabricated frequency language, and wrote a short usage note grounded in dictionary evidence. No new grammar system was introduced; the chapter built a research habit — consulting evidence, then applying judgment — that will support the precision-focused chapters ahead in Unit IV.
Chapter Review
Before moving to Chapter 17, confirm that you can:
Analyse
- read a dictionary or usage-note entry and identify its collocation, valency, and register information;
- distinguish a well-supported usage claim from an unverified guess;
- identify an unnatural collocation resulting from direct transfer from English; and
- recognize when a usage judgment should be labeled as a general impression rather than measured evidence.
Produktion
- compare two near-synonyms using collocation and register evidence;
- describe usage patterns using qualitative frequency language;
- write a concise, evidence-based usage note; and
- explain and defend a word choice in speech, citing appropriate evidence.
Practical Performance Task
Kapitel 16 — Praktische Aufgabe
Eine Gebrauchsnotiz erstellen und begründen — Creating and Defending a Usage Note
Complete the Writing Workshop task above, then present your usage note aloud to a partner or record it, using the Speaking Practice format above as a guide. Be ready to answer at least two follow-up questions about your evidence.
1. Einträge lesen
Read the dictionary entries closely and note collocation and register information.
2. Vergleich ziehen
Compare the near-synonyms using the evidence found, not intuition alone.
3. Notiz schreiben
Write a concise, evidence-based usage note with a corrected example.
4. Wahl begründen
Present and defend the recommendation aloud, answering follow-up questions.
| Criterion | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Evidence use | The recommendation is grounded in the reference entries, not personal preference alone |
| Collocation accuracy | The usage note correctly identifies a natural collocation and an unnatural one |
| Responsible frequency language | No fabricated statistics; qualitative usage language is used appropriately |
| Clarity and concision | The usage note is clear, well organized, and appropriately brief |
| Standard German accuracy | The note is written and spoken in accurate, intelligible standard German |
Developing
The note identifies a preferred word but relies mainly on intuition, with limited or vague reference to evidence.Solid
The note recommends a word choice supported by specific evidence from the entries and uses qualitative usage language appropriately.Strong
The note precisely compares both words using collocation and register evidence, avoids any fabricated statistic, includes a well-chosen corrected example, and the learner defends the choice confidently and honestly under follow-up questioning.Answer Key
Guided Practice
- "Das Problem machen" is grammatically well formed, but machen is a very general verb that native usage prefers to reserve for concrete or neutral objects (Hausaufgaben, Kaffee, Fotos); for abstract negative outcomes like "Problem," more specific verbs such as verursachen are the natural collocation.
- Open production; acceptable answers include "ein Problem verursachen" and "ein Problem schaffen," each with a plausible example sentence.
- Open production; a good answer uses a full sentence such as "'Verursachen' kollokiert häufig mit 'Problem' und 'Schaden.'"
- Open production; a good answer avoids any specific invented number and instead uses words such as häufig, gelegentlich, or selten.
- Open production; learners should identify a specific word and state what reference tool they would consult to check it.
Listening Practice — Comprehension Questions
- A dictionary is sometimes not enough on its own because it rarely shows how a word actually combines with other words in real use.
- A corpus can show real examples of how a word is actually used in real texts.
- Weil nicht jede im Korpus vorkommende Kombination automatisch die beste Wahl für jeden Kontext ist; das eigene Urteil bleibt entscheidend.
Reading Practice — Comprehension Questions
- It typically takes objects such as Schaden, Probleme, Verzögerungen, Kosten, and Missverständnisse.
- Das Register wird als neutral bis formell angegeben, gebräuchlich in Berichten, Verträgen und offizieller Korrespondenz.
- It explicitly says that machen is used less often than more specific verbs like verursachen or anrichten with words like "Problem" or "Schaden," and that the combination can sound unusual in formal texts.
- Open production; the expected recommendation is verursachen (or schaffen), justified by the collocation and register information in the entries.
Speaking and Writing
Open production. Evaluate using the performance task criteria table and rubric scale above, with particular attention to evidence use, collocation accuracy, and responsible frequency language.
Independent Study Tools
Für Selbstlerner
- Choose a sentence you recently wrote in German and identify one word you chose mainly because it seemed like a safe, general translation. Look up an alternative and compare collocation evidence.
- Practice rewriting a fabricated-sounding frequency claim ("this is used 90% of the time") into a qualitative one ("this is used frequently").
- Ask a study partner or editor to flag one word choice in your writing that sounds slightly translated, and research a more natural alternative together.
Selbstüberprüfung
- Did I check a reference source before recommending a word choice, rather than relying on impression alone?
- Did I avoid inventing any frequency statistic?
- Could I explain, out loud, exactly what evidence supports my recommendation?
Looking Ahead
Was Sie nach Kapitel 16 können — What you can do after Chapter 16
You can now use dictionaries, corpora, and usage references to evaluate collocation, valency, and register, and you can describe usage patterns responsibly, without fabricating frequency claims. This research habit — checking evidence, then applying judgment — supports the precision work ahead. Chapter 17 builds directly on this foundation by focusing on word formation, valency, and precision in vocabulary choice at a more advanced level.