Correspondence (letter to the editor): The Zeitgeist Dominates

The basis of the literature search for this article was, according to the authors, the database of the ’Clinical Adhesion Research and Evaluation’ (CARE) working group. This database includes articles published in PubMed and Medline since 1960 and is updated with the latest relevant articles every month. Unfortunately this time restriction entails the entire loss of both German and European scientific literature predating 1960. (e.g. Payr, Arch. f. klin. Chir. 1919, 1922, Biermer, Zbl. Gynäk. 1949, Rössle, Zbl. Path. 1949, Trompke u. Siegner, Langenb. Arch. 1956). In the bibliography of this article, out of 25 references only one is from a German author (Dembrowski, 1889). 24 quotes taken from the database are from foreign scholars. The contemporary tendency to turn a blind eye to German scientific literature cannot be denied. Out of the 49 references to German institutions, amongst the 1755 relevant PubMed references, not one is mentioned in the bibliography of this review article. None of the 9 publications of the working group of the Department of Surgery at the University Hospital Aachen (Professor Schumpelick) is cited, nor are 3 publications from Austria and Switzerland worthy of mention. As a result, for us surgeons, this particularly interesting field; the problem of intra-abdominal adhesion is inadequately covered. The renunciation of the languages of European scientific research, including German, in favour of the English monoculture leads inevitably to linguistic impoverishment. The call by ADSiC (Arbeitskreis Deutsche Sprache in der Chirurgie; Working Committee for German Language in Surgery) for the conscious use of German scientific and technical language does not seem misplaced.