You know the German definition of "konsequent"?

Konsequent heißt: Heute so, morgen so.

Inkonsequent heißt: Heute so, morgen so.

(Depends a bit on the intonation.)

I see what you mean ...

But is that an actual saying/joke? If so, why would that word attract
such attention?

"respectively" is correct where "beziehungsweise" is, only
its position in the sentence is different: "A bzw. B" becomes "A or B,
resp.".

That's simply wrong.

"bzw." is used in German far, far, far, far more than "respectively" is
used in English, and the best translation for "bzw." is very often
simply "or."

"beziehungsweise" has a second, wrong meaning: it replaces any
"und" in spoken language in order to give the speaker more time to
think about what he wanted to say; in American English, the same
function is achieved by starting the sentence with a "basically" that
is devoid of meaning.

In article <401010E1.3AA@worldnet.att.net>, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

You know the German definition of "konsequent"?

Konsequent heißt: Heute so, morgen so.
Inkonsequent heißt: Heute so, morgen so.

(Depends a bit on the intonation.)

I see what you mean ...

But is that an actual saying/joke? If so, why would that word attract
such attention?

As it is, the two sentences together have a similar significance as the
two English sentences:

Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.

They are correct, each alone is idiomatic, and together they show
how features outside the written language (in one case intonation,
in the other one context) are needed to give them meaning. Some people,
like myself, find such word-plays funny.

"respectively" is correct where "beziehungsweise" is, only
its position in the sentence is different: "A bzw. B" becomes "A or B,
resp.".

That's simply wrong.

"bzw." is used in German far, far, far, far more than "respectively" is
used in English, and the best translation for "bzw." is very often
simply "or."

The question is in how many of these far more cases the German word
"beziehungsweise" is indeed used according to its meaning, to wit
(or: namely?) for establishing an abbreviated template for several
similar sentences, e.g.:

Das Hausrecht in einer Gastwirtschaft oder auf einem Schiff obliegt
dem Wirt beziehungsweise dem Kapitän.

Would one use "respectively" in such a sentence?

If so, it would be
interesting to find a German sentence where "beziehungsweise"
makes sense but "respectively" does not.

Used simply as substitute for "oder", it inflates the sentence and there
is no "Beziehung" to which "beziehungsweise" might refer. Therefore I
added:

"beziehungsweise" has a second, wrong meaning: it replaces any
"und" in spoken language in order to give the speaker more time to
think about what he wanted to say; in American English, the same
function is achieved by starting the sentence with a "basically" that
is devoid of meaning.

Helmut Richter wrote:

In article <401010E1.3AA@worldnet.att.net>, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

"respectively" is correct where "beziehungsweise" is, only
its position in the sentence is different: "A bzw. B" becomes "A or B,
resp.".

That's simply wrong.

"bzw." is used in German far, far, far, far more than "respectively" is
used in English, and the best translation for "bzw." is very often
simply "or."

The question is in how many of these far more cases the German word
"beziehungsweise" is indeed used according to its meaning, to wit
(or: namely?) for establishing an abbreviated template for several
similar sentences, e.g.:

Das Hausrecht in einer Gastwirtschaft oder auf einem Schiff obliegt
dem Wirt beziehungsweise dem Kapitän.

Would one use "respectively" in such a sentence?

No, because it doesn't provide any information that isn't obvious from
"or" (and the corresponding orders of the two pairs of nouns).

In article <401010E1.3AA@worldnet.att.net>, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
....
"bzw." is used in German far, far, far, far more than "respectively" is
used in English, and the best translation for "bzw." is very often
simply "or."

The question is in how many of these far more cases the German word
"beziehungsweise" is indeed used according to its meaning, to wit
(or: namely?) for establishing an abbreviated template for several
similar sentences, e.g.:

"Jacques" == Jacques Guy <jguy@alphalink.com.au> writes:

Jacques> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
21 Jan 2004 13:11:26 +0100: LEE Sau Dan

[3] I can't find the word "ekspliko". I'm assuming it's a
misspelling of "aspekto".

Jacques> Faut apprendre l'hexagonal mon gars. Chez nous
Jacques> "expliquer" (pron. [Eksplike]) means "to explain"

Yeah. I've forgotten that French is a prerequisite for learning
Esperanto. ;)

LOL.

"Helmut" == Helmut Richter <a282244@mail.lrz-muenchen.de> writes:

"bzw." is used in German far, far, far, far more than
"respectively" is used in English, and the best translation for
"bzw." is very often simply "or."

"beziehungsweise" has a second, wrong meaning: it replaces any
"und" in spoken language

in order to give the speaker more time to think about what he
wanted to say;

in American English, the same function is achieved by starting
the sentence with a "basically" that is devoid of meaning.

"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:

"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:

Peter> I don't know German "clever." What does it mean?

German "clever" is obviously a loan from English. "Clever sein,
direct Line" lautet ein TV Werbung. The native German word is "klug".

Helmut suggested it's a false friend, but nothing he or you said
indicates that it's _not_ a recent borrowing with its English meaning.

"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:

"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net
writes:

Peter> I don't know German "clever." What does it mean?
German "clever" is obviously a loan from English. "Clever
sein, direct Line" lautet ein TV Werbung. The native German
word is "klug".

In article <40111667.316B@worldnet.att.net>, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

Helmut suggested it's a false friend, but nothing he or you said
indicates that it's _not_ a recent borrowing with its English meaning.

It *is* a recent borrowing with its English meaning but, as far as I
am able to say, with different connotations. It is a false friend only
insofar as using the English word "clever" in situations where one
would use "clever" in German context is mostly a bad choice. German
"clever" has nearly always a connotation of "sly, cunning, crafty,
tricky" whereas the English word "clever", if I understand it right,
has no such undertones.

"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:

Peter> LEE Sau Dan wrote:
"Peter" == Peter T Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net
writes:

Peter> I don't know German "clever." What does it mean?
German "clever" is obviously a loan from English. "Clever
sein, direct Line" lautet ein TV Werbung. The native German
word is "klug".

Peter> Helmut suggested it's a false friend, but nothing he or you
Peter> said indicates that it's _not_ a recent borrowing with its
Peter> English meaning.

Right. That's not a false friend. The worst false friend I'd come
across for German/English is "Gift". The difference in the meanings
is so big and "harmful"!

Also the German "beziehungsweise" also has another meaning: "besser gesagt"
("said better"), I think. "Suche Verwandschaft bzw. Stammbaum" is one
that came up with Google, "Theater Musical De La Guarda bzw. Delaguarda
Ferienh?user" is another.

Dik T. Winter <Dik.Winter@cwi.nl> wrote:

Also the German "beziehungsweise" also has another meaning: "besser gesagt"
("said better"), I think. "Suche Verwandschaft bzw. Stammbaum" is one
that came up with Google, "Theater Musical De La Guarda bzw. Delaguarda
Ferienh?user" is another.

The English "a.k.a." might be a reasonable translation for this in some
cases.

"Richard" == Richard Green <edfromo@spiffy.ox.compsoc.net> writes:

Also the German "beziehungsweise" also has another meaning:
"besser gesagt" ("said better"), I think. "Suche Verwandschaft
bzw. Stammbaum" is one that came up with Google, "Theater
Musical De La Guarda bzw. Delaguarda Ferienh?user" is another.