Werk Nummer or Werke Nummer?

[Tony Kambic]

Please comment also on how 'Engine Number' is written in German. Steve Sheflin keeps a great database of those serials.

Thanks

Tony

[ChristianK]

Sorry folks, but you all got it wrong:
The singular form is either "Werknummer" or "Werk-Nummer" (the latter one is a rather outdated variant). Plural would be "Werknummern" or "Werk-Nummern"
In German language, if you combine two words you either put them directly together without any gap or you use a hyphen. Something like "Werk Nummer" or "Werk Nr." is always incorrect.

"Engine number" would be Motornummer or Motor-Nummer.

Cheers,
Christian

EDIT: Just saw that Roland did got it right - sorry Roland!

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by ChristianK

In German language, if you combine two words you either put them directly together without any gap or you use a hyphen.
Cheers,
Christian

But isn't it possible to use two nouns together without automatically combining them into a compound?

[ChristianK]

No, not really. At least I can't think of any example at the moment. In fact, the English habit of combining two nouns into one without any markers can be confusing to a German reader from time to time

[Jaap Woortman]

Theo,

In an original factory document of Fieseler I have found the following:
- Werk-Nr.
- Werk.Nr.
- Werk.-Nr.
- Werk Nr.
- W.-Nr.
- Werk Nr
- Werk-Nummer
- W.Nr.
They were all used in one document.

Jaap

[ChristianK]

Proof once more that people are sloppy. In German documents you can also find "Bf109", "Me 109", "Me-109" and so on, even though "Bf 109" is the correct designation.
In fact, there is no single correct abbreviation for "Werknummer". People could use whatever variant they liked..

[Tom Willis]

I agree - the issue for me and I am certain for other researchers is not whether the correct spelling or abbreviation is used. But that the correct W/Nr. (which is my abbreviation) is written - typed - applied - painted, to either documents, Flugbuchs or to the aircraft themselves (ie photos). But we all know that mistakes were made (as then under stress or boredom during wartime or today with re-copying data. It is human nature.
Very frustrating and confusing but sometimes you get lucky with duplications and the correct W/Nr. can be corrected from a 2nd source. Such is the researcher's lot you either accept it or you go crazy. The same applies to all those incorrect abbreviations!

[Theo Boiten]

Thanks for all your replies chaps, this develops into an interesting thread!

Cheers, Theo

[RolandF]

As you all know - Germans love to create word behemoths like Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänswitwe or similar. To make it more readable, oftenly hyphens are used like Donaudampfschiffahrts-Kapitänswitwe or Donau-Dampfschiffahrts-Kapitänswitwe. Both versions are correct.
Jaaps abbreviations are correct, too. With the exeption of #3, #4 and #6.
They derive from two word variations:
Werknummer and
Werk-Nummer
Both are correct because of the above-mentioned reasons.
So it depends on how much time and space you have to spend if you write huge lists or use it only for a single time.
Personally I´d prefer Werk-Nr. or W.Nr. In German the dot always significates the use of an abbreviation.

But don´t use Werkenummer or similar ;-)

Regards
RolandF

[ChristianK]

Roland, you forgot: Since the orthographic reform of 2006 we use three "f" in Dampschifffahrt