ausweichende

[Melnyk]

Hi

having big trouble with this sentence - or more specifically the word 'ausweichende '

Lopatyn erweitern konnte, gegen das ausweichende SS-Btl. Galizien weiter nach Weste

anyone like to have a go?

Mike

[Waleed Y. Majeed]

Would “evasive” be any help?

Waleed

[Melnyk]

thank you for the suggestion but I have tried this option. I thought about it - how could you possibly refer to a unit as being "evasive"? it just does not make any sense to me. Here is the paragraph in full
"In den frühen Morgenstunden gelang es dem Gegner, einen Brückenkopf bei 424 (Bordulaski) zu gewinnen und im umfassenden Angriff mit mindestens 2 Btl. den Ort 417 (Szczurowice) zu nehmen. Seit etwa 9.00 Uhr ist der Gegner von 348 (Stanislawczyk) und 424 (Bordulaski) im ständigen Vorgehen gegen die ausweichenden Teile von SS-Btl. Atlantik. Ostrand 344 (Lopatyn) war bereits 15.00 Uhr erreicht".

One meaning of ausweichenden is 'side-stepping' or bypassing. Lord knows I am no expert on the German language despite years of working with it but I figured it COULD be translated this way

"After extensive enemy attack by at least 2 Btls. Szczurowice was lost in the morning. At present enemy, who could extend his bridgehead to the western edge of the forest west of Lopatyn attacks against the bypassed (das ausweichende ) SS Btl. ‘Atlantic’ [Galicia] further west"

I am not however convinced I am right and was looking for confirmation from a native speaker who is familiar with this kind of German terminology

Mike

[wwilson]

bab.la gives this as a military sense of the word:

ausweichen (też: sich zurückziehen) to withdraw [withdrew|withdrawn]

Thus, the passage may refer to withdrawing elements of SS-Btl. Atlantik.

[history1]

[...]
"In den frühen Morgenstunden gelang es dem Gegner, einen Brückenkopf bei 424 (Bordulaski) zu gewinnen und im umfassenden Angriff mit mindestens 2 Btl. den Ort 417 (Szczurowice) zu nehmen. Seit etwa 9.00 Uhr ist der Gegner von 348 (Stanislawczyk) und 424 (Bordulaski) im ständigen Vorgehen gegen die ausweichenden Teile von SS-Btl. Atlantik. Ostrand 344 (Lopatyn) war bereits 15.00 Uhr erreicht".
[...]
Mike

Hi Mike,
here is my suggestion (as German native speaker):

In the early morning hours the enemy was able to take a bridgehead near 424 (Bordulaski) and to take the village 417 (Szczurowice) in an excessive attack with at least two battalions. Since about 9 am. the enemy is advancing [proceeding?] continuosly from 348 (Stanislawczyk) and 424 (Bordulaski) against the yielding parts of the SS-battalion Atlantik. The eastern edge 344 (Lopatyn) has been reached at 3 pm.

"ausweichen" means in this case to avoid contact. I hope that "yielding" can be also used.

Cheers,
Roman

[history1]

bab.la gives this as a military sense of the word:

ausweichen (też: sich zurückziehen) to withdraw [withdrew|withdrawn]

Thus, the passage may refer to withdrawing elements of SS-Btl. Atlantik.

I woulnd´t choose that option. I can avoid contact to enemy forces ( = ausweichen) also in reconnaissance patrols, as sniper, or simply in any movement of troops.

[wwilson]

I can avoid contact to enemy forces ( = ausweichen) also in reconnaissance patrols, as sniper, or simply in any movement of troops.

It depends on the context lent by the action in question. We have only one sentence, but it states (General Anton) Lopatin was able to push further to the west because of the [ ? ] SS-Btl Galizien.

"Withdrawing" would fit well into that sentence.

"Evading" is somewhat a possibility, if the entire passage was describing something like a trap being set for Lopatin; thus the SS-Btl side-stepped to allow Lopatin to move his unit into the trap. That would be a fancy maneuver for grand tactical / operational warfare.

[Melnyk]

thanks again for such extremely helpful suggestions. the original report is from the KTB of 4 Pz army so it is written this way without too much detail. the SS-Btl Galizien was not in good shape and not effective as a fighting unit so it could not hold its positions, and Germans being as they are just don't seem to mince their words : ) what I mean by this is I cannot imagine they would report the battalion as being 'evasive' or that they were 'avoiding contact' because they were in a front line sector where they could not exactly 'avoid contact' because of the repeated attacks against them. thinking very hard about these suggestions it is far more likely to be 'yielding' (i.e. to give way) because it implies that the unit could not hold its positions AND possibly withdrew because of it

such a pleasure to read such educated and informative replies

best wishes

Mike Melnyk

[wwilson]

Mike, glad you found the discussion of assistance. If you could satisfy a bit of curiosity on my part -- was this "SS-Btl Galizien" part of the 14th SS Division ? Curious because that division also carried the name "Galizien".

[Melnyk]

hi

it was not part of the Galician division AT THE TIME but was raised from men who enlisted for the 'Galician Division' but were formed into 4 Polizei Regiments instead which were staffed trained and deployed by the Ordnungspolizei, however they were incorporated into it about 4 weeks later

Mike

[wwilson]

Thanks for that!

[history1]

I can avoid contact to enemy forces ( = ausweichen) also in reconnaissance patrols, as sniper, or simply in any movement of troops.

It depends on the context lent by the action in question. We have only one sentence, but it states (General Anton) Lopatin was able to push further to the west because of the [ ? ] SS-Btl Galizien.

[...]

By God, what are you talking about? It´s not about a general Lopatin but about the town Lopatyn in Ukrainia.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lopatyn
https://goo.gl/maps/ZzDWYewqorjRrYgNA
And your claim "it states (General Anton) Lopatin was able to push further to the west because of the [ ? ] SS-Btl Galizien" is utter nonsense as the text reads

Ostrand 344 (Lopatyn) war bereits 15.00 Uhr erreicht"
=
The eastern edge of 344 ( = Lopatyn) has been reached at 3 pm.

[wwilson]

By God, what are you talking about?

Servus.

Hey, you are correct. Thanks for the clarification.