Fáhrer?

[KarlGauss]

Is Fáhrer a variant of Fuhrer? Maybe a typo? Something else?

It appears throughout Hans Frank's (and other's) testimony at Nuremberg.

Thanks!

[MikeG]

After looking at the link my initial impression is that someone used an improper ASCII code. Granted my German is basic at best but I've never seen it like that. It could be an obscure legalistic variant.

[Polycarp]

I believe MikeG is right. The word used there is clearly Führer -- either Hitler identified by title, or the word used to describe the concept of his role, in distinct usages.

[KarlGauss]

Thanks.

As I've read more, it's become clear that the usage is deliberate and is quite consistent. Specifically, we have Darer for Durer (the artist), Obergruppenfáhrer for Obergruppenfuhrer, etc.

I guess that was just the way they chose to translate( ?transliterate) things at the time.

[Johanna]

All it means is that your browser was set for a different encoding protocol than the one the page was made with. To get it to display correctly, try tweaking the encoding from the View menu on your browser.

Sometimes the source code of the page, if the web developers are doing their job right, will specify the encoding used.

[Johanna]

Well, clever though my idea was, it was wrong. The meta tag said iso-8859-1, and my browser was set for iso-8859-1 too. So the encoding goofup must have gotten in at the pre-HTML text editing stage. They must have had the document prepared on a word processor with one encoding and then opened it with software using a different encoding before converting it to HTML. Someone wasn't paying attention. Send a note to the webmeister, they'll probably thank you.

[KarlGauss]

Hmmm ... I've tried a bunch of variations for encoding and nothing changes. Weird.

[Johanna]

Please send any comments or suggestions concerning this famous trials website to:

linderd@umkc.edu

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by MikeG

After looking at the link my initial impression is that someone used an improper ASCII code. Granted my German is basic at best but I've never seen it like that. It could be an obscure legalistic variant.

This makes sense (although it leaves some questions):
"ü" = ALT + 0252
"á" = ALT + 0225

While I would think it unlikely that anyone manually entered ALT + 0225 throughout a document, it might be more likely that someone set up a translator (say, from OCR to document or something similar) and accidentally placed "0225" into the translation table rather than "0252".

[KarlGauss]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

This makes sense (although it leaves some questions):
"ü" = ALT + 0252
"á" = ALT + 0225

While I would think it unlikely that anyone manually entered ALT + 0225 throughout a document, it might be more likely that someone set up a translator (say, from OCR to document or something similar) and accidentally placed "0225" into the translation table rather than "0252".

Very clever 'solution'!