When referring to a person only by their surname, should I keep or omit “von”?How to alphabetically sort a list of names?When does one use “von” and when “durch” to form the passive?

How does this piece of code determine array size without using sizeof( )?

How to customize the pie chart background in PowerPoint?

Is it standard to have the first week's pay indefinitely withheld?

Hotel booking: Why is Agoda much cheaper than booking.com?

Former Employer just sent me an IP Agreement

Does the talk count as invited if my PI invited me?

How do you cope with rejection?

Was Tyrion always a poor strategist?

Why does a table with a defined constant in its index compute 10X slower?

How was the blinking terminal cursor invented?

Combining two Lorentz boosts

How to laser-level close to a surface

What would be the game balance implications for using the Gygax method for applying falling damage?

What should I wear to go and sign an employment contract?

Can more than one instance of Bend Luck be applied to the same roll by multiple Wild Magic sorcerers?

RegEx with d doesn’t work in if-else statement with [[

Windows reverting changes made by Linux to FAT32 partion

Who is frowning in the sentence "Daisy looked at Tom frowning"?

Is there any deeper thematic meaning to the white horse that Arya finds in The Bells (S08E05)?

Largest memory peripheral for Sinclair ZX81?

I just found out that my recent promotion comes with an unexpected 24/7/365 on-call status

Why didn't Daenerys' advisers suggest assassinating Cersei?

Why is so much ransomware breakable?

How do we explain the use of a software on a math paper?



When referring to a person only by their surname, should I keep or omit “von”?


How to alphabetically sort a list of names?When does one use “von” and when “durch” to form the passive?













12















When referring to people, often they are named by their surname only (no titles, first names or initials if the surname alone would unambiguously denote the person in a context. E.g. Haydn, Merkel.



Some surnames contain the prefix "von" (or similar forms like "vom"/"von dem"). Surnames of non-German origin can have equivalent forms (e.g. Dutch "van", Italian "di", etc. etc.).



In German, the "von" has 2 origins:



  1. Strictly denoting origin (literally meaning "of" or "from") with a place names. As such strictly part of the surname proper (e.g. Erich von Däniken);

  2. Added to the surname upon ennoblement (meaning "of the house of"). After the abolishment of the nobility in 1919 - either becoming part of the surname proper (Germany) or being dropped (Austria). (e.g. Friedrich von Schiller)

I understand for alphabetization purposes the word without the preposition(s) is considered (D for Däniken, S for Schiller), as it is done in the Netherlands, while in e.g. Belgium and South Africa the "V" of "van" is used for this purpose.



With all this in mind, I see that often a person is denoted by his surname without the preposition(s) (e.g. Beethoven, Goethe) irrespective whether it is a commoner surname or denoting nobility - but cases can also be found where it is included (e.g. Von Hindenburg vs. the ill-fated dirigible Hindenburg).



(Beethoven provides an interesting example since the surname Van Beethoven is of Dutch origin and the "van" has not been germanized to "von", although the composer is considered German since being in the 3rd generation.)



Is there any rule or style guide clarifying how this (the dropping or retaining of prepositions like "von") is best done? Is it up to the whim of the author? Also, is there a reasoning behind a particular style?



I am asking particularly about German usage. I am aware of the same sort of process in other languages (e.g. William of Occam => Occam's Razor, Rene Descartes => Cartesian Coordinates, etc. but also Da Vinci for Leonardo.)










share|improve this question



















  • 1





    The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

    – guidot
    May 5 at 15:50
















12















When referring to people, often they are named by their surname only (no titles, first names or initials if the surname alone would unambiguously denote the person in a context. E.g. Haydn, Merkel.



Some surnames contain the prefix "von" (or similar forms like "vom"/"von dem"). Surnames of non-German origin can have equivalent forms (e.g. Dutch "van", Italian "di", etc. etc.).



In German, the "von" has 2 origins:



  1. Strictly denoting origin (literally meaning "of" or "from") with a place names. As such strictly part of the surname proper (e.g. Erich von Däniken);

  2. Added to the surname upon ennoblement (meaning "of the house of"). After the abolishment of the nobility in 1919 - either becoming part of the surname proper (Germany) or being dropped (Austria). (e.g. Friedrich von Schiller)

I understand for alphabetization purposes the word without the preposition(s) is considered (D for Däniken, S for Schiller), as it is done in the Netherlands, while in e.g. Belgium and South Africa the "V" of "van" is used for this purpose.



With all this in mind, I see that often a person is denoted by his surname without the preposition(s) (e.g. Beethoven, Goethe) irrespective whether it is a commoner surname or denoting nobility - but cases can also be found where it is included (e.g. Von Hindenburg vs. the ill-fated dirigible Hindenburg).



(Beethoven provides an interesting example since the surname Van Beethoven is of Dutch origin and the "van" has not been germanized to "von", although the composer is considered German since being in the 3rd generation.)



Is there any rule or style guide clarifying how this (the dropping or retaining of prepositions like "von") is best done? Is it up to the whim of the author? Also, is there a reasoning behind a particular style?



I am asking particularly about German usage. I am aware of the same sort of process in other languages (e.g. William of Occam => Occam's Razor, Rene Descartes => Cartesian Coordinates, etc. but also Da Vinci for Leonardo.)










share|improve this question



















  • 1





    The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

    – guidot
    May 5 at 15:50














12












12








12


1






When referring to people, often they are named by their surname only (no titles, first names or initials if the surname alone would unambiguously denote the person in a context. E.g. Haydn, Merkel.



Some surnames contain the prefix "von" (or similar forms like "vom"/"von dem"). Surnames of non-German origin can have equivalent forms (e.g. Dutch "van", Italian "di", etc. etc.).



In German, the "von" has 2 origins:



  1. Strictly denoting origin (literally meaning "of" or "from") with a place names. As such strictly part of the surname proper (e.g. Erich von Däniken);

  2. Added to the surname upon ennoblement (meaning "of the house of"). After the abolishment of the nobility in 1919 - either becoming part of the surname proper (Germany) or being dropped (Austria). (e.g. Friedrich von Schiller)

I understand for alphabetization purposes the word without the preposition(s) is considered (D for Däniken, S for Schiller), as it is done in the Netherlands, while in e.g. Belgium and South Africa the "V" of "van" is used for this purpose.



With all this in mind, I see that often a person is denoted by his surname without the preposition(s) (e.g. Beethoven, Goethe) irrespective whether it is a commoner surname or denoting nobility - but cases can also be found where it is included (e.g. Von Hindenburg vs. the ill-fated dirigible Hindenburg).



(Beethoven provides an interesting example since the surname Van Beethoven is of Dutch origin and the "van" has not been germanized to "von", although the composer is considered German since being in the 3rd generation.)



Is there any rule or style guide clarifying how this (the dropping or retaining of prepositions like "von") is best done? Is it up to the whim of the author? Also, is there a reasoning behind a particular style?



I am asking particularly about German usage. I am aware of the same sort of process in other languages (e.g. William of Occam => Occam's Razor, Rene Descartes => Cartesian Coordinates, etc. but also Da Vinci for Leonardo.)










share|improve this question
















When referring to people, often they are named by their surname only (no titles, first names or initials if the surname alone would unambiguously denote the person in a context. E.g. Haydn, Merkel.



Some surnames contain the prefix "von" (or similar forms like "vom"/"von dem"). Surnames of non-German origin can have equivalent forms (e.g. Dutch "van", Italian "di", etc. etc.).



In German, the "von" has 2 origins:



  1. Strictly denoting origin (literally meaning "of" or "from") with a place names. As such strictly part of the surname proper (e.g. Erich von Däniken);

  2. Added to the surname upon ennoblement (meaning "of the house of"). After the abolishment of the nobility in 1919 - either becoming part of the surname proper (Germany) or being dropped (Austria). (e.g. Friedrich von Schiller)

I understand for alphabetization purposes the word without the preposition(s) is considered (D for Däniken, S for Schiller), as it is done in the Netherlands, while in e.g. Belgium and South Africa the "V" of "van" is used for this purpose.



With all this in mind, I see that often a person is denoted by his surname without the preposition(s) (e.g. Beethoven, Goethe) irrespective whether it is a commoner surname or denoting nobility - but cases can also be found where it is included (e.g. Von Hindenburg vs. the ill-fated dirigible Hindenburg).



(Beethoven provides an interesting example since the surname Van Beethoven is of Dutch origin and the "van" has not been germanized to "von", although the composer is considered German since being in the 3rd generation.)



Is there any rule or style guide clarifying how this (the dropping or retaining of prepositions like "von") is best done? Is it up to the whim of the author? Also, is there a reasoning behind a particular style?



I am asking particularly about German usage. I am aware of the same sort of process in other languages (e.g. William of Occam => Occam's Razor, Rene Descartes => Cartesian Coordinates, etc. but also Da Vinci for Leonardo.)







prepositions person-names






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 6 at 6:09









V2Blast

1194




1194










asked May 5 at 14:32









fr13dfr13d

32616




32616







  • 1





    The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

    – guidot
    May 5 at 15:50













  • 1





    The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

    – guidot
    May 5 at 15:50








1




1





The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

– guidot
May 5 at 15:50






The dirigible Hindenburg as opposed to the person never possessed a von.

– guidot
May 5 at 15:50











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














Alphabetisation should be done with the von in German, as it is officially part of the name, not anything you can just leave out (like a title). However, in practical terms, many people omit the von.



The same with talking to someone: Polite people don't omit the von, except if the person with the von also omits it. So it depends on how the person wants to be addressed. Again, in practical terms, any name is subject to shortening if it has more than one syllable (and people like to test their limits with you), and the von often gets left out - especially if you are not someone special. So even though it shouldn't be so, it's often a sign of respect to not drop it, which is the reason why some people like to drop it.



When thinking about examples where the von is never dropped, I actually only find names which were popularised with the von internationally. The already mentioned von Neumann architecture, or von Braun the brown rocket scientist, science fiction author von Daeniken and so on.



Even people of respect, like von Weizsaecker, can be affected by the vanishing von.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2





    Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

    – fr13d
    May 6 at 7:42


















3














There's regional differences:



In most of southern Germany and Austria "von" and "von und zu" (see below) means "nobility". This can be "old", inherited titles as well as ennobled titles (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who is also a good example of use with and without title: If you refer to von Goethe before 1782, you should omit the "von" - He received his title during that year).



"von und zu" means "old nobility" - The family was part of the aristocracy since the middle ages and still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate - Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (a former MP and grandfather of former Minister of Defence Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg) would be an example of "old nobility".



In the Netherlands, on the other hand, "van" has nothing to do with nobility - it's just the place of origin of a name. Due to geographic proximity, the usage of "von" seems to be at least partially similar in parts of northern Germany.



With noble ranks factually abolished in 1919 in Germany, all of this has no longer much meaning - It's just names. The constitution of 1919 claimed:




Advantages or disadvantages under the public law caused by birth or social rank are to be suspended. Aristocratic titles are simply part of the name and can no longer be awarded




Just like people owning double names ("Müller-Lüdenscheid") that sometimes like to drop part of their name in everyday usage, persons with names containing "van" or "von" might prefer to use or not use that - It's simply a matter of personal preference - Or like Goethe said:




Ein Titel und ein Orden hält im Gedränge manchen Puff ab...




The rule is simple - "von" is a part of a person's name - If they want to be called like that, it's just good practice to use the name they have to address them.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

    – mach
    May 6 at 9:55






  • 1





    "von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

    – LangLangC
    May 6 at 10:11


















0














As far as I'm aware, the "von" is almost always dropped when referring to a person by surname, except perhaps in very formal circumstances where it would feel rude not to use exactly the correct name, e.g. in the news. (And a newsspeaker would probably use the correct name of a living person. I don't think they'd ever refer to Schiller as "von Schiller".)



One nevertheless says von Neumann, probably because this what he's known as in the USA; simply saying Neumann could be confusing.






share|improve this answer




















  • 3





    I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

    – c.p.
    May 5 at 21:37






  • 1





    I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 21:57











  • @c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 22:01











  • @c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

    – sgf
    May 6 at 6:31












  • Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

    – c.p.
    May 6 at 6:51












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "253"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgerman.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52074%2fwhen-referring-to-a-person-only-by-their-surname-should-i-keep-or-omit-von%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4














Alphabetisation should be done with the von in German, as it is officially part of the name, not anything you can just leave out (like a title). However, in practical terms, many people omit the von.



The same with talking to someone: Polite people don't omit the von, except if the person with the von also omits it. So it depends on how the person wants to be addressed. Again, in practical terms, any name is subject to shortening if it has more than one syllable (and people like to test their limits with you), and the von often gets left out - especially if you are not someone special. So even though it shouldn't be so, it's often a sign of respect to not drop it, which is the reason why some people like to drop it.



When thinking about examples where the von is never dropped, I actually only find names which were popularised with the von internationally. The already mentioned von Neumann architecture, or von Braun the brown rocket scientist, science fiction author von Daeniken and so on.



Even people of respect, like von Weizsaecker, can be affected by the vanishing von.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2





    Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

    – fr13d
    May 6 at 7:42















4














Alphabetisation should be done with the von in German, as it is officially part of the name, not anything you can just leave out (like a title). However, in practical terms, many people omit the von.



The same with talking to someone: Polite people don't omit the von, except if the person with the von also omits it. So it depends on how the person wants to be addressed. Again, in practical terms, any name is subject to shortening if it has more than one syllable (and people like to test their limits with you), and the von often gets left out - especially if you are not someone special. So even though it shouldn't be so, it's often a sign of respect to not drop it, which is the reason why some people like to drop it.



When thinking about examples where the von is never dropped, I actually only find names which were popularised with the von internationally. The already mentioned von Neumann architecture, or von Braun the brown rocket scientist, science fiction author von Daeniken and so on.



Even people of respect, like von Weizsaecker, can be affected by the vanishing von.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2





    Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

    – fr13d
    May 6 at 7:42













4












4








4







Alphabetisation should be done with the von in German, as it is officially part of the name, not anything you can just leave out (like a title). However, in practical terms, many people omit the von.



The same with talking to someone: Polite people don't omit the von, except if the person with the von also omits it. So it depends on how the person wants to be addressed. Again, in practical terms, any name is subject to shortening if it has more than one syllable (and people like to test their limits with you), and the von often gets left out - especially if you are not someone special. So even though it shouldn't be so, it's often a sign of respect to not drop it, which is the reason why some people like to drop it.



When thinking about examples where the von is never dropped, I actually only find names which were popularised with the von internationally. The already mentioned von Neumann architecture, or von Braun the brown rocket scientist, science fiction author von Daeniken and so on.



Even people of respect, like von Weizsaecker, can be affected by the vanishing von.






share|improve this answer













Alphabetisation should be done with the von in German, as it is officially part of the name, not anything you can just leave out (like a title). However, in practical terms, many people omit the von.



The same with talking to someone: Polite people don't omit the von, except if the person with the von also omits it. So it depends on how the person wants to be addressed. Again, in practical terms, any name is subject to shortening if it has more than one syllable (and people like to test their limits with you), and the von often gets left out - especially if you are not someone special. So even though it shouldn't be so, it's often a sign of respect to not drop it, which is the reason why some people like to drop it.



When thinking about examples where the von is never dropped, I actually only find names which were popularised with the von internationally. The already mentioned von Neumann architecture, or von Braun the brown rocket scientist, science fiction author von Daeniken and so on.



Even people of respect, like von Weizsaecker, can be affected by the vanishing von.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered May 5 at 22:13









Carl DombrowskiCarl Dombrowski

1412




1412







  • 2





    Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

    – fr13d
    May 6 at 7:42












  • 2





    Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

    – fr13d
    May 6 at 7:42







2




2





Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

– fr13d
May 6 at 7:42





Regarding your first paragraph, this is what I found: "According to German alphabetical sorting, people with von in their surnames – of noble or non-noble descent alike – are listed in telephone books and other files under the rest of their names (e.g., the economist Ludwig von Mises would have been found under M in the phone book rather than V). " -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von

– fr13d
May 6 at 7:42











3














There's regional differences:



In most of southern Germany and Austria "von" and "von und zu" (see below) means "nobility". This can be "old", inherited titles as well as ennobled titles (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who is also a good example of use with and without title: If you refer to von Goethe before 1782, you should omit the "von" - He received his title during that year).



"von und zu" means "old nobility" - The family was part of the aristocracy since the middle ages and still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate - Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (a former MP and grandfather of former Minister of Defence Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg) would be an example of "old nobility".



In the Netherlands, on the other hand, "van" has nothing to do with nobility - it's just the place of origin of a name. Due to geographic proximity, the usage of "von" seems to be at least partially similar in parts of northern Germany.



With noble ranks factually abolished in 1919 in Germany, all of this has no longer much meaning - It's just names. The constitution of 1919 claimed:




Advantages or disadvantages under the public law caused by birth or social rank are to be suspended. Aristocratic titles are simply part of the name and can no longer be awarded




Just like people owning double names ("Müller-Lüdenscheid") that sometimes like to drop part of their name in everyday usage, persons with names containing "van" or "von" might prefer to use or not use that - It's simply a matter of personal preference - Or like Goethe said:




Ein Titel und ein Orden hält im Gedränge manchen Puff ab...




The rule is simple - "von" is a part of a person's name - If they want to be called like that, it's just good practice to use the name they have to address them.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

    – mach
    May 6 at 9:55






  • 1





    "von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

    – LangLangC
    May 6 at 10:11















3














There's regional differences:



In most of southern Germany and Austria "von" and "von und zu" (see below) means "nobility". This can be "old", inherited titles as well as ennobled titles (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who is also a good example of use with and without title: If you refer to von Goethe before 1782, you should omit the "von" - He received his title during that year).



"von und zu" means "old nobility" - The family was part of the aristocracy since the middle ages and still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate - Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (a former MP and grandfather of former Minister of Defence Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg) would be an example of "old nobility".



In the Netherlands, on the other hand, "van" has nothing to do with nobility - it's just the place of origin of a name. Due to geographic proximity, the usage of "von" seems to be at least partially similar in parts of northern Germany.



With noble ranks factually abolished in 1919 in Germany, all of this has no longer much meaning - It's just names. The constitution of 1919 claimed:




Advantages or disadvantages under the public law caused by birth or social rank are to be suspended. Aristocratic titles are simply part of the name and can no longer be awarded




Just like people owning double names ("Müller-Lüdenscheid") that sometimes like to drop part of their name in everyday usage, persons with names containing "van" or "von" might prefer to use or not use that - It's simply a matter of personal preference - Or like Goethe said:




Ein Titel und ein Orden hält im Gedränge manchen Puff ab...




The rule is simple - "von" is a part of a person's name - If they want to be called like that, it's just good practice to use the name they have to address them.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

    – mach
    May 6 at 9:55






  • 1





    "von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

    – LangLangC
    May 6 at 10:11













3












3








3







There's regional differences:



In most of southern Germany and Austria "von" and "von und zu" (see below) means "nobility". This can be "old", inherited titles as well as ennobled titles (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who is also a good example of use with and without title: If you refer to von Goethe before 1782, you should omit the "von" - He received his title during that year).



"von und zu" means "old nobility" - The family was part of the aristocracy since the middle ages and still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate - Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (a former MP and grandfather of former Minister of Defence Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg) would be an example of "old nobility".



In the Netherlands, on the other hand, "van" has nothing to do with nobility - it's just the place of origin of a name. Due to geographic proximity, the usage of "von" seems to be at least partially similar in parts of northern Germany.



With noble ranks factually abolished in 1919 in Germany, all of this has no longer much meaning - It's just names. The constitution of 1919 claimed:




Advantages or disadvantages under the public law caused by birth or social rank are to be suspended. Aristocratic titles are simply part of the name and can no longer be awarded




Just like people owning double names ("Müller-Lüdenscheid") that sometimes like to drop part of their name in everyday usage, persons with names containing "van" or "von" might prefer to use or not use that - It's simply a matter of personal preference - Or like Goethe said:




Ein Titel und ein Orden hält im Gedränge manchen Puff ab...




The rule is simple - "von" is a part of a person's name - If they want to be called like that, it's just good practice to use the name they have to address them.






share|improve this answer















There's regional differences:



In most of southern Germany and Austria "von" and "von und zu" (see below) means "nobility". This can be "old", inherited titles as well as ennobled titles (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who is also a good example of use with and without title: If you refer to von Goethe before 1782, you should omit the "von" - He received his title during that year).



"von und zu" means "old nobility" - The family was part of the aristocracy since the middle ages and still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate - Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (a former MP and grandfather of former Minister of Defence Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg) would be an example of "old nobility".



In the Netherlands, on the other hand, "van" has nothing to do with nobility - it's just the place of origin of a name. Due to geographic proximity, the usage of "von" seems to be at least partially similar in parts of northern Germany.



With noble ranks factually abolished in 1919 in Germany, all of this has no longer much meaning - It's just names. The constitution of 1919 claimed:




Advantages or disadvantages under the public law caused by birth or social rank are to be suspended. Aristocratic titles are simply part of the name and can no longer be awarded




Just like people owning double names ("Müller-Lüdenscheid") that sometimes like to drop part of their name in everyday usage, persons with names containing "van" or "von" might prefer to use or not use that - It's simply a matter of personal preference - Or like Goethe said:




Ein Titel und ein Orden hält im Gedränge manchen Puff ab...




The rule is simple - "von" is a part of a person's name - If they want to be called like that, it's just good practice to use the name they have to address them.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 5 at 23:16

























answered May 5 at 15:27









tofrotofro

44.5k146133




44.5k146133







  • 1





    Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

    – mach
    May 6 at 9:55






  • 1





    "von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

    – LangLangC
    May 6 at 10:11












  • 1





    Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

    – mach
    May 6 at 9:55






  • 1





    "von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

    – LangLangC
    May 6 at 10:11







1




1





Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

– mach
May 6 at 9:55





Toponymic “von” is also common in Switzerland.

– mach
May 6 at 9:55




1




1





"von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

– LangLangC
May 6 at 10:11





"von und zu": 1. this means they had one seat, then moved to another; which one is the traditional? 2. "still sits on their traditional aristocratic estate": if that means land, then no, not necessarily; could be impoverished, denounced, expropriated, from the far east (East-Prussia) // "all of this has no longer much meaning" you don't go to doctors (magazines/ watch TV) and don't compete for for rent apartments, jobs etc. This "no longer" is an idealised goal, written in law, but not achieved in all parts of real life.

– LangLangC
May 6 at 10:11











0














As far as I'm aware, the "von" is almost always dropped when referring to a person by surname, except perhaps in very formal circumstances where it would feel rude not to use exactly the correct name, e.g. in the news. (And a newsspeaker would probably use the correct name of a living person. I don't think they'd ever refer to Schiller as "von Schiller".)



One nevertheless says von Neumann, probably because this what he's known as in the USA; simply saying Neumann could be confusing.






share|improve this answer




















  • 3





    I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

    – c.p.
    May 5 at 21:37






  • 1





    I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 21:57











  • @c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 22:01











  • @c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

    – sgf
    May 6 at 6:31












  • Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

    – c.p.
    May 6 at 6:51
















0














As far as I'm aware, the "von" is almost always dropped when referring to a person by surname, except perhaps in very formal circumstances where it would feel rude not to use exactly the correct name, e.g. in the news. (And a newsspeaker would probably use the correct name of a living person. I don't think they'd ever refer to Schiller as "von Schiller".)



One nevertheless says von Neumann, probably because this what he's known as in the USA; simply saying Neumann could be confusing.






share|improve this answer




















  • 3





    I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

    – c.p.
    May 5 at 21:37






  • 1





    I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 21:57











  • @c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 22:01











  • @c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

    – sgf
    May 6 at 6:31












  • Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

    – c.p.
    May 6 at 6:51














0












0








0







As far as I'm aware, the "von" is almost always dropped when referring to a person by surname, except perhaps in very formal circumstances where it would feel rude not to use exactly the correct name, e.g. in the news. (And a newsspeaker would probably use the correct name of a living person. I don't think they'd ever refer to Schiller as "von Schiller".)



One nevertheless says von Neumann, probably because this what he's known as in the USA; simply saying Neumann could be confusing.






share|improve this answer















As far as I'm aware, the "von" is almost always dropped when referring to a person by surname, except perhaps in very formal circumstances where it would feel rude not to use exactly the correct name, e.g. in the news. (And a newsspeaker would probably use the correct name of a living person. I don't think they'd ever refer to Schiller as "von Schiller".)



One nevertheless says von Neumann, probably because this what he's known as in the USA; simply saying Neumann could be confusing.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 7 at 8:53

























answered May 5 at 15:04









sgfsgf

2,207523




2,207523







  • 3





    I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

    – c.p.
    May 5 at 21:37






  • 1





    I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 21:57











  • @c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 22:01











  • @c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

    – sgf
    May 6 at 6:31












  • Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

    – c.p.
    May 6 at 6:51













  • 3





    I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

    – c.p.
    May 5 at 21:37






  • 1





    I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 21:57











  • @c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

    – scienceponder
    May 5 at 22:01











  • @c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

    – sgf
    May 6 at 6:31












  • Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

    – c.p.
    May 6 at 6:51








3




3





I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

– c.p.
May 5 at 21:37





I strongly disagree. One says von Neumann; nobody would understand Neumann.

– c.p.
May 5 at 21:37




1




1





I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

– scienceponder
May 5 at 21:57





I totally agree. Examples: Beethovenstraße and not von-Beethoven-Straße, Stauffenbergattentat and not von-Stauffenberg-Attentat, Bismarckhering and not von-Bismarck-Hering, etc..

– scienceponder
May 5 at 21:57













@c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

– scienceponder
May 5 at 22:01





@c.p. sorry a instead of o of course.

– scienceponder
May 5 at 22:01













@c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

– sgf
May 6 at 6:31






@c.p. von Neumann is indeed the only counterexample I'm aware of, and I'm fairly certain that we call him von Neumann because that's how he's known in the USA (and hence in his mathematics in general), so we're basically borrowing the American usage. But I don't see how one counterexample leads you to disagree with what is true in every other case you could name? Do you also disagree with the idea that the plural in English is formed by adding -s to a word?

– sgf
May 6 at 6:31














Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

– c.p.
May 6 at 6:51






Actually I oversaw the almost before always. So I cannot contradict your answer. And I didn't analyse the case that it can be due to the English language usage, since we also in German say von-Neumann-Algebra, etc.

– c.p.
May 6 at 6:51


















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to German Language Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgerman.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52074%2fwhen-referring-to-a-person-only-by-their-surname-should-i-keep-or-omit-von%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Wikipedia:Vital articles Мазмуну Biography - Өмүр баян Philosophy and psychology - Философия жана психология Religion - Дин Social sciences - Коомдук илимдер Language and literature - Тил жана адабият Science - Илим Technology - Технология Arts and recreation - Искусство жана эс алуу History and geography - Тарых жана география Навигация менюсу

Bruxelas-Capital Índice Historia | Composición | Situación lingüística | Clima | Cidades irmandadas | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióneO uso das linguas en Bruxelas e a situación do neerlandés"Rexión de Bruxelas Capital"o orixinalSitio da rexiónPáxina de Bruselas no sitio da Oficina de Promoción Turística de Valonia e BruxelasMapa Interactivo da Rexión de Bruxelas-CapitaleeWorldCat332144929079854441105155190212ID28008674080552-90000 0001 0666 3698n94104302ID540940339365017018237

What should I write in an apology letter, since I have decided not to join a company after accepting an offer letterShould I keep looking after accepting a job offer?What should I do when I've been verbally told I would get an offer letter, but still haven't gotten one after 4 weeks?Do I accept an offer from a company that I am not likely to join?New job hasn't confirmed starting date and I want to give current employer as much notice as possibleHow should I address my manager in my resignation letter?HR delayed background verification, now jobless as resignedNo email communication after accepting a formal written offer. How should I phrase the call?What should I do if after receiving a verbal offer letter I am informed that my written job offer is put on hold due to some internal issues?Should I inform the current employer that I am about to resign within 1-2 weeks since I have signed the offer letter and waiting for visa?What company will do, if I send their offer letter to another company