"Ich bin nicht der Verfasser."

Translation:I am not the author.

January 8, 2013



Is there any significant difference between "Verfasser" and "Autor"?

January 8, 2013


"Autor" is more specific than "Verfasser". E.g. you could use 'Verfasser' for a composer ("Der Verfasser dieses Liedes war erst zwanzig Jahre alt"). 'Autor' does only apply to writers, journalists,...

January 8, 2013


I see. Danke!

January 8, 2013


I don't think so. I just think of Verfasser as Writer, and Autor as Author, even though they mean pretty much the same thing to me in English.

January 8, 2013


Übrigens, wo wir gerade von Autoren sprechen, könnte mir jemand erklären was der Unterschied zwischen einem Schriftsteller und einem Schreiber ist? Danke im Voraus.

August 28, 2015


Sorry für die verspätete Antwort: Ein Schriftsteller ist eine Person, die (meist beruflich) Bücher schreibt, um damit Geld zu verdienen. Das Wort ,,Schreiber'' wird im heutigen Deutsch eigentlich nicht mehr benutzt. Damit wurden im Mittelalter, vor allem aber im alten Ägypten und Griechenland Menschen bezeichnet, dessen Beruf es war Bücher (ab)zuschreiben. Da damals nur die wenigsten Menschen schreiben konnten, waren Schreiber meist angesehen und wohlhabend. Heutzutage gibt es das in dieser Form nicht mehr, allerdings gibt es Menschen, die z.B. während einer Versammlung mitschreiben (ich glaube allerdings nicht, dass sie das beruflich machen). Ich weiß auch nicht, ob der Name dafür wirklich Schreiber ist. Ich hoffe, meine Antwort hat dir geholfen.

August 3, 2016


Is there a reason for Verfasser be this way? I mean, ver=... fasser=...

September 16, 2015


There is, but it is rather verfass(en) = to compose, write + -er = indicating someone (or something) that accomplishes the action (same meaning and origin as the English -er in "singer" and similar words). As for why ver- + fassen (to grab) should mean "compose", there is certainly a complex and convoluted history of metaphors and meaning shifts involved, I am sure that they both had similar meanings at a certain point in history. The same happens in practically any language, the first English example that comes to mind is the "-ceive" family of verbs (receive, conceive, deceive, perceive), which (through French) all came from the Latin capere (to grab, to catch, hence "captive" = caught) affixed with a variety of prefixes (re- = again, con = with, de = from, per = through) and took on very different meanings with time.

June 8, 2017


could verfasser be author in the sense of someone who wrote or did something without necessarily being someone who writes stories or books or is an author by profession?

September 26, 2014


Sure. You could also be a 'Verfasser' of a letter. Es ist jemand, der einen Text verfasst [hat].

May 9, 2019


Can it also be: "Ich bin der Verfasser nicht"?

December 17, 2014


No, that word order is not possible.

December 18, 2014


Could you explain my friend please?

January 21, 2015


I am not certain, but I believe that since bin is a copula rather than a proper transitive verb, nicht goes immediately after it: "Ich bin nicht der Verfasser."

July 28, 2015


i think 'nicht' can be placed in the last position if the second word is a verb. But I'm not so sure about it..

March 29, 2015


Is "Verfasser" in the Akkusativ case here?

September 8, 2015


The sein verb takes Nominative

Ich bin nicht der* Verfasser (Nominative )

I hope that's helps

January 23, 2016


Schriftsteller is another synonyme.

April 7, 2016


Why wouldn't be "Ich bin kein Verfasser"?

December 4, 2016


Because "Ich bin kein Verfasser" would mean "I am not an author" rather than "I am not the author".

January 15, 2017


ich bin nicht der vater

July 17, 2016


ver = be done (making a verb passive) fassen = take So I guess, Ver-fasser = someone or something being taken away

Umm, it sees not exact here.

September 20, 2014


No, someone else explained that ver as a prefix gives the reverse meaning of what comes after. For example “Verkäufer“ means seller or vendor while “Käufer“ means buyer. So reverse “takes away“ and this is someone who gives or creates something for people. Composer or Writer...

December 8, 2014


What grammatical rule says here it should not be written as "Vervasser"? Just curious.

July 12, 2013


The same that says that 'rule' isn't spelled 'rool'.

July 27, 2013


More sophisticated languages, unlike English, usually tend to have rules on how to write words down; Even if some vocals sound the same, they are in fact written differently.in different cases. For example: Volkswagen could be potentially written "Folkswagen" and it'd sound just (about) the same. And usually in cases like these a rule might come in use, such as "if there's a vowel after the sound "F" then we write it as V" ... so ... .here is where I tried to get a potential rule one might use to decide easier on which letter to use for which vocal.

July 28, 2013


Please watch your language. If it were spelled 'Folkswagen' it'd sound exactly the same. There's no distinction between the f-/f/ sound and the v-/f/ sound. (But note that sometimes v is pronounced as /v/). Spelling is a matter of convention. You never have a one to one correspondance between spelling and sound, in any language. Whether 'v' or 'f' is used to represent the /f/ depends on etymology, linguistic context and other factors. For all pratical purposes: whether to use 'f' or 'v' is an arbitrary convention just as it is in the rule/rool case. Bottom line: there is no such rule.

July 28, 2013


Like you stated, whether 'f' or 'v' is used to represent the /f/ sound is due to etymological reasons. Because of these reasons, there are actual rules for when the German V is to be pronounced /v/: -in the middle of a word stem -in the beginning of words that are foreign in origin -in family and place names not of German or Dutch origin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronunciation_of_v_in_German

So, there is a distinction between F and V, which means that it is not arbitrary, and that the two letters are not interchangeable, as you seem to be suggesting.

If I somehow misrepresented what you said, or made an incorrect statement, please correct me. I do not want to take anything you said out of context. Thank you.

September 23, 2014


What I am saying is that there is no 1:1 correspondence between sound and orthography and that you can't deduce the spelling from the sound, not that you can use whichever spelling you want.

September 23, 2014


There is no specific current reason, but there is a very specific historical one: initially all these /f/-words were pronounced, as today, with a "hard" /f/ sound and spelt accordingly. If I remember correctly there was no /v/ sound in German yet―‹w› was still pronounced /w/, as in English today. At a certain point in the history of the German language, prevocalic /f/ came to be pronounced /v/, and the spelling started to reflect that by writing ‹v› in this position. This change, however, soon reverted, but the spelling was being standardised by that time, so the v spelling stuck, although not in all words, as you can see from fassen, fürchten and similar words. The fact that the /f/ > /v/ changed occurred only before vowels is the reason why /f/ is always spelt ‹f› before consonants and the spellings ‹vr›, ‹vl› do not exist (if not, maybe, in some foreign loanwords, however I have never encountered such a word yet).

June 8, 2017


Um, "f" and "v" aren't interchangeable -- if they still sound identical to you, you might want to listen to words with "f" and "v" on the slow speed.

July 27, 2013
Learn German in just 5 minutes a day. For free.