Teehee!

I'm not sure I get the Superman one. :?

forgotten_dreamer
I'm not sure I get the Superman one. :?

Neitzsche and his philosophy of the ubermensch?

Rand had some even more crazy ideas of “the great man.”

Nietzsche had this idea of “?bermensch”, which has been translated into “superman” even though the more accurate and widely accepted translation is “overman”.

The wiki entry for ?bermensch, because I do not feel like explaining it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubermensch

A lot of my philosophic study is around Nietzsche. He's so crazy!

beholdsa

forgotten_dreamer
I'm not sure I get the Superman one. :?

Neitzsche and his philosophy of the ubermensch?

Rand had some even more crazy ideas of “the great man.”

Of course. I knew that…. ops:

Super simply means over or above, not necessarily better, though that is the common implication. Its opposit is Supra or Sub, meaning under or below. Ueber therefore means the exact same thing as Super, even with the common implication of better, because Ueber can have the same connotation.

I guess what I'm saying is that using Super as a translation for Ueber is completely and perfectly valid. So there's no reason to differentiate.

“Misleading translation
The translation of ?bermensch as ”Superman“ may compound the misconception. ?ber is, among other things, the German equivalent of the prefix trans-. It has also gained a colloquial use in English with (sometimes spelled ”ueber“ or ”uber“). Examples of prefixed words in German with the ”trans-“ meaning are: ?berwindung (”overcoming“), ?berstehen/durchstehen (”come through“/”get over“), ?bersetzen (”translate“/”take across“). Some scholars therefore prefer the translation ”overman“, not simply because this best captures the other meaning of ?ber (”transman“ wouldn't be acceptable English) but because the point of the ?bermensch is that man needs to overcome.

Furthermore, the German adverb ?bermenschlich is common and used in contexts such as ”mit ?bermenschlichen Kr?ften gelang es ihm…“ (”with a force no human being is capable of he managed to…“ or ”with superhuman force…“), the connotation is that of leaving the human sphere. Parallel constructions can be found in ?bernat?rlich (”no longer natural“, ”transcendental“), ?berirdisch (”heavenly“, literally ”unearthly“). ”Superman“ lacks the German connotation of a sphere beyond human knowledge and power. In addition, Mensch is less specifically male than the English ”man“, closer at times to the English ”human“. Mensch is to be understood as a neuter form of a noun.

One contemporary version of this ideal, although in no way explicitly based upon the ideals of Nietzsche but rather on the ideals of many people from the past and present, is to some extent transhumanism.”

Fuel for the fire.

…and thus spank Zarathustra.

Anthony, I know all this. I am fluent in German (I have been classified an Advanced Speaker of German), have a B.A. in German Studies and have lived in Germany for more than a year. Tee hee!

And while your points do have merit, the fact is that “superman” is just as legitimate as “overman”, because it means the same darned thing. The problem comes when you adapt this into American culture, which has erroneous connotations to the phrase “superman”.

As to ueber (this computer doesn't have the German keyboard program setting, so I have to use the ue) being translated as trans, you only actually listed one example of that - the word translate being uebersetzen. However, it can easily be argued that trans and over have the same sense. If you think in the case of translate, one way you can describe the word is by saying that you are taking a word over to another language - you are transferring a word from one language set over into another language set. In such cases, over takes on the sense of between, just as trans always has. The other examples you gave (ueberwinden and durchstehen) both took the word over in them as well, not trans, though you could perhaps take trans in them, if you worked hard enough (see point on over being a sense of trans).

As to your point on mensch not meaning man, in English, man is not necessarily specifically only male anyway, instead often takes the form of human or mankind. How often have you heard or read things talking about the Age of Man or a great thing for man. You need look no farther than Tolkein, who at the end of the Lord of the Rings, says that it is time for man to take power, and often identifies the races as orcs, dwarves, elves, hobbits and man or men. He also refers to the cities of man. And he is not the only one. In St. Augustine of Hippo's work “City of God”, he often refers to the City of Man, being the earthly, materialistic and evil world of humans. You do not read these things and think “What about women? Aren't they in there, too?” Rather, you read them and know that man is referring to mankind.

I do not understand what you are getting at with the uebermenschlich, uebernatuerlich, ueberirdisch etc. Please tell me the point that you were trying to make with that.

Man, nitpicking is a lot of work. I was reading through and thought, “I've been seeing this unnecessary distinction between the two too often recently, so I'm just going to point this out real quick.” I never expected to have to justify myself. Or to post my credentials. Yeesh.