Talk:tschüß

The lemma must obviously be tschüss, which is a standard spelling that is also common. tschüß may be more common than tschüs, but it isn't justified to have a non-standard spelling as lemma when there's a good alternative. -- I also doubt that "tschüß" is most common spelling at all. Here in North Rhine-Westphalia (accounting for almost a fourth of Germany's inhabitants), at least, I don't remember having seen it even once. -- I'm too lazy to change this right now, but I will. Kolmiel (talk) 16:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If it's more common, it is standard. My labeling of 'tschüß' as the most common form was based on number of Google hits at the time; Google Ngram says that 'tschüss' is massively surging in uses in their corpus since a while. Google Ngram also marks 'tschüs' as more common than 'tschüß', which might be true for published books, but certainly is betrayed as a lie by a normal Google search. Make of that what you want, but don't confuse standard with official. For colloquial terms, we should ignore official spellings, since no office will ever end their letter about your taxes with tschüs anyway. Description vs. prescription. ('Ignore' as in 'not base decisions on it', not as in 'exclude from the dictionary'.) Korn &#91;kʰũːɘ̃n&#93; (talk) 17:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If it's common, it's standard. Yes. But still the lemma should be an officially correct spelling (that's what I meant by standard). Preferably at least. If there were only tschüß and tschüs, I wouldn't even be against having tschüß as lemma. But since we have a form that's common and officially standard, that'll be the obvious choice. Kolmiel (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * By the way, does Kluge say it's from Dutch adjuusjes? I don't have him here right now. Pfeiffer doesn't mention it, nor do these: . I'm also asking because this explanation doesn't really explain much. The diminutive of adju would be adjuutjes, so if there was a form adjuusjes the existence of the -s in it would still be anomalous. Kolmiel (talk) 01:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * My argument only was against 'tschüs'. I'm fine centralising at the dominating form, though finding this out is odd for me since it's not at all reflected in the speech of my surroundings. I don't actually have any etymological dictionaries, so I'm afraid I can't help you much. Korn &#91;kʰũːɘ̃n&#93; (talk) 08:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Duden of FRG: However, in this case tschụ̈ß (= /tʃʏs/) is just another pronunciation of the spelling tschüs. That is, it doesn't source  = /tʃʏs/.
 * Duden Rechtschreibung der deutschen Sprache und der Fremdwörter (Der Duden in 10 Bänden, volume 1), 18th edition, 1980, page 698 (together with page 9): "tsch ü s! [auch: tschụ̈ß] […]"

Anyway, Duden of DDR of 1976 and Theodor Ickler's (non-reformed) dictionary are said (at faql.de) to properly have  = /tschụ̈ß/ = /tʃʏs/. If any of them does, this would be sourced properly.

How about the other form? Can  = /tʃyːs/ be sourced, or is this made-up? -84.161.43.152 14:31, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Proscription
It's not a "lack of inclusion". The amtliches Regelwerk including the amtliches Wörterverzeichnis and reformed Duden only have tschüs and tschüss making tschüß proscribed just like daß, Krem, Majonäse, Grislibär and more. The amtliches Regelwerk as well as Duden doesn't have to say "tschüß is wrong" or "Majonäse is wrong" to make it proscribed as it's sufficient to say "only tschüs and tschüss are correct" or "only Mayonnaise is correct" to make other forms proscribed. duden.de simply removed their entry Majonäse, thus doesn't mention the now proscribed form Majonäse at all in the dictionary part and only has Mayonnaise. Anyway, in case of Majonäse it was mentioned in many newspapers that it became wrong or put more neutral proscribed in 2017: welt.de, diepresse.com, spiegel.de (cp. the Quiz) - duden.de (announcing the 27th ed. of printed Duden), korrekturen.de. In case of "tschüß" it would be harder to find similar press reports, but that doesn't change the situation that it now is proscribed. Some others sources: -84.161.43.152 14:31, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * canoo.net states that tschüs (short vowel) is incorrect and that only tschüss (short vowel) and tschüs (long vowel) are correct.
 * dwds.de states that both tschüß and tschüs are wrong -- which would only be correct for tschüs (short vowel), not for tschüs (long vowel).
 * korrekturen.de just like the amtliches Regelwerk and reformed Duden only has tschüss and  tschüs (but might miss the older pre-reformed DDR spelling tschüß).
 * faql.de explains it in more detail. It also has: "Der Ost-Duden ließ schon 1976 [...] die Schreibweise tschüß (mit kurzem »ü«) zu, ebenso Theodor Ickler in seinem Rechtschreibwörterbuch aus dem Jahre 2000". Theodor Ickler's dictionary rather has the traditional orthography than the reformed.