questions-2

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank!

When we use zahlen and when we use bezahlen. Do both are same?

[night dagger]

You can say both, some say bezahlen is just slightly more formal but yeah, both work just fine

[vague rain]

Hallo, warum sagt Man "ich vertraue nur deinen Tipps", wenn Tipps ist in die Mehrzahl?

[long whale]

What case does "vertrauen" require...?

[vague rain]

i checked a dictionary and its akkusativ

[plush pelican]

What dictionary did you use?

https://www.dict.cc/?s=vertrauen

[vague rain]

oh so this is wrong?

[plush pelican]

That has "auf" in it

[vague rain]

ahh ok sorry

[plush pelican]

there's no "auf" in your sentence

[plush pelican]

Which case is required will be different for just a regular object versus an object of a preposition

So you know what "jdm" means, right?

[vague rain]

yes that makes sense ... vielen dank. i have a list of common dativ verbs so i should've started off by checking that, es tut mir leid

yes 🙂

[plush pelican]

and how do you do (Plural, Dative)?

[vague rain]

lol im struggling ive never had to answer that

[plush pelican]

Well, that's the situation you have with your sentence

[vague rain]

yes, den, deinen

schwarzen

[high flume]

hey guys, I don't understand why this is andere

[vague rain]

it's because of "das"

ok im really bad at explaining this but i can give it a try unless someone is faster than me

[plush pelican]

You need to start learning about adjective declension

[vague rain]

LOL

[high flume]

alright thank you all

[plush pelican]

Duolingo often fails to explain the grammar concepts you need to actually do the sentences properly

Here's a playlist on Adjective declension: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKCEuz6wxDQnX_zs1mK8r-s3MxNKZPCYZ

[vague rain]

i learnt that bit with duolingo and i got it fine at the end

to be fair it wasnt just duolingo but mainly

jedenfalls, danke für die Hilfe

[high flume]

thank you so much I will surely work on them

[vague rain]

this list here has really helped me, dont worry if it now looks confusing though 🙂

[stable moon]

Hi guys
I have a question for you.
Have you ever heard a German speaking in English? Do you know what are the typical sounds they substitute? For example, I know some of them replace the English "w" for a German "v". Despite the fact that this is not very related to the German language, it will be very helpful to me.

[plush pelican]

Have you simply tried searching on YouTube "common mistakes Germans make speaking English"?

[stable moon]

Oh. That's a great idea 🙂

I didn't think about it. Thank you so much! 😄

[south zenith]

When do I become my steak

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank ❤

[kind knoll]

j as y, v as f, e as ö, are what come to mind

[warped oriole]

You become it when you are brave.
Du bekommst es wenn du brav bist.

(You'll get it if you're good.)

[rapid zodiac]

Does da also mean then? In this sentence: Nein, da ist der Deutschkurs.

Nevermind I figured it out

[livid gull]

Hey there, still not sure on how to use “Die”, “Das”, and “Der”. I understand that they are different gender specifications. But I’m still stuck, please help

[charred harbor]

faq gender

[stoic mauve]

Grammatical gender

German nouns are sorted in three different genders: masculine, neuter and feminine. These have nothing to do with sex or social gender.
The first thing genders will influence are articles like der, das, die. Each word has its own and you better get it right: some words that look identical can have different meanings depending on the gender they're used with. For example:
die Band = the (musical) band,
der Band = the (book) volume,
das Band = the tape.

Some words, mainly trademarks and loanwords, have multiple acceptable genders while having no change in meaning:
der Jogurt = das Jogurt
das Virus = der Virus
These may vary by region or colloquiality.

💢 But WHY, German, WHY ⁉
Gender is actually quite useful! Since sentence structure is less rigid than in English, grammatical case helps you tell the various elements apart (with some practice), and that works through genders: each gender has its own forms, which makes everything a little less ambiguous. Besides, as you've seen with Band above, it allows us to make up words with different meanings that look the same but are not ambiguous, and if that's not magic, I don't know what is. ✨

🙀 But how am I supposed to tell them apart? 🙀
Check out >explain gender patterns. 😉

[livid gull]

Cheers

[long whale]

tl;dr It's arbitrary. German just has those categories, they're part of the language, they are important. 🌻

[faint atlas]

Articles are there to modify their nouns. Each article needs to go before a noun. Some examples are:
Der Apfel
Die Schule
Das Papier

Each is representing a different gender, as you said. I hope this helps.

[long whale]

If you post this in #1033125270217048246 (where it belongs), you're more likely to get an answer. 🌻

[wraith kelp]

ok thanks

[vernal ermine]

What is the correct word for outdoor activities?

[bold ore]

I think there is no exact word, most of the times the English word outdoor is used and you say outdoor-Aktivitäten. But you could say Aktivitäten im Freien or maybe Aktivitäten an der frischen Luft or something like that... But there is no specific term that I know of

[vernal ermine]

Thanks bro but Aktivitäten im Freien completely changes the meaning .

[brave harbor]

nope thats how we say it

[bold ore]

It's not an exact synonym because we don't have it but I think it's quite similar isn't it? Or do I have a false understanding if outdoor activities? I thought it is just activities you do outside

[vernal ermine]

Ich möchte Aktivitäten im Freien machen. Can we consider it as I would like to do freetime activities OR outdoor activities?

[brave harbor]

the primary meaning is outdoor activities. but the former kinda results out of it

like i would assume you mean free time activities OUTDOORS by it, but im freien definitely means outdoors

[bold ore]

Freetime activities are Freizeitaktivitäten. You could say ich möchte Freizeitaktivitäten draußen machen.
However depending on the context its a bit weirdly worded, maybe you could say it differently ich möchte etwas draußen machen, ich möchte etwas im Freien machen, ich suche eine Freizeitaktivitäten, depending on the context

[vernal ermine]

Does Freizeitaktivitäten also conveys the same meaning?

[brave harbor]

it conveys the meaning of free time activities, but not necxessarily outdoors

[brave harbor]

wait whats " ich suche eine Freizeitaktivitäten" supposed to mean

[bold ore]

For example if the context was that you are talking to someone and you want to find out what hobbys you can do in you free time you can say i am searching for a freetime activity...
Depending on the context you can also just say hobby in German for something you do regularly in your freetime, however thats also not necessarily outdoors

[vernal ermine]

Draußenaktivitäten. Is this word exist in German?

[brave harbor]

no

[bold ore]

No but if it's for a casual context you can just use it, everyone will understand that you mean activities outside

[brave harbor]

no but "eine aktivitäten" doesnt work. and no one would say "Freizeitaktivitäten" either ways, its a very 'formal' wording. "ich mache gerne sport draußen" or "ich suche ein outdoor-hobby" would be much better

[vernal ermine]

All right I use Aktivitäten im Freien for outdoor activities.

[brave harbor]

like "Freizeitaktivitäten: Lesen, Musik hören" is what I'd put on my CV as a kid without experience so it doesnt look empty

[vernal ermine]

@brave harbor Vielen Dank

@bold ore Vielen Dank

[stable moon]

Thank you 🙂 This will actually help me 😄

[sterile locust]

Declension in Nominativ:
Das andere.
Der andere.
Die andere.

[dense forum]

Hi, all! I’d like to ask a question. Are “wenn” an “ob” synonyms?

As in, are they always interchangeable?

[plain umbra]

No, they mean different things.

Wenn is if/when and ob is if/whether.

[dense forum]

okey, noted! Dankeschön!

[vernal ermine]

1_________ ich die neue Stelle habe,verdiene ich mehr Geld. Hier which will be correct seit/seitdem? I am confused.

[plush pelican]

"ob" is when there's a binary thing. If you can say "whether" instead, you probably mean "ob"

I don't know if it will rain (or not).
I don't know whether it will rain (or not.)
Ich weiß nicht, ob es regnet (oder nicht).

[plush pelican]

As a conjunction, you can use either, I believe

[vernal ermine]

I think some rules are there.

[plush pelican]

Hammer's German Grammar 17.3.5

[vernal ermine]

@plush pelican is there any major difference between seit and seitdem?

[plush pelican]

Apparently "seit" could be considered a bit more colloquial, based on Hammer's.

[kind knoll]

Seit is both a preposition and a subordinate conjunction, seitdem is an adverb and a temporal conjunction

[plush pelican]

But not so colloquial that you can't use it

[kind knoll]

seit is usually used with dates and numbers while seitdem refers to a specific action done in the past

[vernal ermine]

I read that topic 2 days before

[vernal ermine]

Exactly,This is what I studied.

[vernal ermine]

In this sentence it relates with action, but seit is used here. why it so? I don't have any idea about it.

@kind knoll @plush pelican ?

[plush pelican]

seit = seitdem here

Hammer's is saying, this used to just be a colloquial version of "seitdem", but now you can use either

[vernal ermine]

@plush pelican Vielen Dank ❤

Is there any rule to start a sentence with um_____zu?

Can I use same like, which ( um zu) is used in the second sentence?

[charred harbor]

I know it’s context dependent but that probably wouldn’t be future tense in most cases right? “Ich weiß nicht ob es regnet”

[plush pelican]

So far, I've seen one post where someone said "you can start a sentence with an 'um zu' clause, but it's not recommended, because it is considered bad style"

I'm not sure, though

[vernal ermine]

Yesterday I did an exercise, where I got that question.

[plush pelican]

🤷‍♂️ Idk about whether it is "most cases" or not, but you can use present tense to indicate future in German

https://deutsch.lingolia.com/de/grammatik/satzbau/nebensaetze/infinitivsaetze

Here, it says such Infinitivsätze like "um...zu..." can be at the front, but are usually behind.

[vernal ermine]

Like: um mich zu erholen , gehe ich ins Kino.

[plush pelican]

yeah, no, I get it

[vernal ermine]

Since it is a reflexive verb, I think we are using mich there in between um and zu. Am I right?

[plush pelican]

yes

[vernal ermine]

What if it is not a reflexive verb?

How we will be the structure?

[plush pelican]

The same as it would be if the "um...zu..." was the second clause

Ich arbeite, um Geld zu verdienen.
Um Geld zu verdienen, arbeite ich.

The difference is in the other clause: whenever a Nebensatz is in front of a Hauptsatz, the Nebensatz counts as "position 1" for the Hauptsatz, which rearranges the Hauptsatz.

Infinitivsätze like "um...zu..." are a type of Nebensatz, so this rule applies for them as well.

(Um Geld zu verdienen,)1 arbeite2 ich3

[vernal ermine]

How you frame this sentence: To speak well, first I learn the alphabets.

[plush pelican]

This is interesting

I think you have an "um...zu..." clause first, but I'm very unused to such things

I really want a native to come in here who can answer you with confidence

But, theoretically, I would think it would be something like:

Um eloquent reden zu können, lerne ich als Erstes das Alphabet.

Or:

Um gut sprechen zu können, lerne ich zuerst das Alphabet.

[vernal ermine]

Without modal verb, how you will frame?

[plush pelican]

I don't know that you can do this exact sentence without a modal verb

because really, you are talking about "being able to" speak well

[vernal ermine]

I just like to learn that structure.

[plush pelican]

Like, you could say, "Um gut zu sprechen, nehme ich das Essen aus meinem Mund."

🤣

In order to speak well, I take the food out of my mouth.

[plush pelican]

Um zu trainieren, schwimme ich jeden Tag.

Um Sport zu machen, spiele ich mit meinem Bruder Basketball.

Again, ask a native about all of this; I feel like I don't encounter these kinds of sentences with "um...zu..." at the beginning hardly at all.

[vernal ermine]

Can we use gut( adjective) between um and zu ?

[plush pelican]

Do you have a noun to attach "gut" to?

gut what?

I suppose if the verb was "sein", you could use "gut" as a stand-alone adjective

Um gut zu sein, muss man gegen das Böse kämpfen.
In order to be good, one must fight against evil.

[vernal ermine]

Can we tell umzu combinely without placing anything in the middle like in this sentence?

[plush pelican]

I mean, I wrote the sentence, so yes, I believe you are allowed to do that

Maybe you should review "um...zu..." clauses

Ich verdiene Geld.
Ich arbeite, um Geld zu verdienen.

Why is there "Geld" in the "um...zu..." clause?

Because it was there in the Hauptsatz as well.

If the Hauptsatz version doesn't have anything, the "um...zu..." version won't, either.

Ich trainiere.
Ich schwimme jeden Tag, um zu trainieren.

[vernal ermine]

Yeah, I will do and Bro, you also have good amount of knowledge that is nearer to native 😊

[plush pelican]

Ich helfe ihr.

Ich gebe mein Geld aus, um ihr zu helfen.

whatever objects or adverbs or prepositional phrases you have in the Hauptsatz, you will have in the "um...zu..." clause as well

[vernal ermine]

Can you tell this sentence without using um__zu so that I can understand better.

[plush pelican]

🤔

[vernal ermine]

Like 2 separate sentence .

[plush pelican]

Ich gebe mein Geld aus. Ich helfe ihr.

[vernal ermine]

As per this rule, your above sentence doesn't share the same object. I got confusion with this. @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

Ich helfe ihr.
Ich gebe mein Geld aus. Ich helfe ihr.
Ich gebe mein Geld aus, um ihr zu helfen.

The first clause, I have added. But the first clause is not affecting the second, except that "ich" is the subject, and so the assumed subject for the "um...zu..." clause.

[vernal ermine]

Now I understand. Before I just compared ( ich gebe mein Geld aus) with (ich helfe ihr).

@plush pelican Vielen Dank ❤

@kind knoll thanks for clarification of my previous question.

[warped oriole]

You mean write umzu instead of um zu?

[vernal ermine]

Ja, that also I would like to know.

[warped oriole]

No if you want to say um zu "in order to" then you need a space.
You sometimes see umzuziehen for example. The verb is umziehen but the infinitive is umzuziehen. But this is another topic. This umzu+verb is not the same as um zu.

[warped oriole]

Like this?

Um schnell zu rennen, muss ich viel trainieren.

Um den großen Mann kennenzulernen, brauche ich Zeit.

[warped oriole]

In your example you also have no noun to attach gut to 🤔
You attach it to the verb "gut essen"

[vernal ermine]

I have a question when we use um zu in a sentence with only a verb, how the sentence will be?

@warped oriole I have some confusion with um zu structure.

[warped oriole]

Just like the examples from Argus.
Um zu verb, verb subject ....

[vernal ermine]

If it is a reflexive verb, where we place sich in that structure?

[warped oriole]

After the comma it's verb subject. But if you flip the sentences then you use subject verb again.

Um zu rennen, muss ich...
Ich muss... , um zu rennen

But the um zu part has always the same structure I think

[warped oriole]

I think everything else you put between um and zu. After zu there has to be a verb and after the verb the sentence is finished.

Um sich (selbst) (an einem Freitag) zu mögen,...

And if you have two verbs like machen könne then it's like this:
Um es machen zu können,...
In order to do it,...

Um zu rennen und zu springen, ...

You also can use "und" after zu+verb to say another zu+verb.

[warped oriole]

But normally you are finished with the "um zu" sentence after the "zu+verb"

[vernal ermine]

Ich lade Sie ein, um Ihnen eine Party in meinem Haus zu geben.

Can I write like this ?

[warped oriole]

Genau. Satzstruktur ist richtig. Aber...you don't say that you give a party in german.

[vernal ermine]

How we tell?

[warped oriole]

Just say: Ich lade Sie zu meiner Party in meinem Haus ein 😄

[plush pelican]

In my example "um gut zu sprechen"?

There, it's an adverb, not an adjective. Hence in English here it translates to "well" instead of "good"

[vernal ermine]

If we use um zu part in the first , does it become wrong both grammatically and in meaning also?

[warped oriole]

Ah ok I see.

[plush pelican]

He means there is a specific noun-verb combination for "throwing a party"

Eine Party schmeißen.

[plush pelican]

This is weird, because Dict.cc actually does have "Party geben" listed. But you say that doesn't work?

[warped oriole]

Grammatically you just have to flip the "ich lade" to "lade ich"

[plush pelican]

I guess "eine Party veranstalten" is the more formal version of "eine Party schmeißen"

[warped oriole]

Why would you invite me to give a party. I mean if I think about it, you could say it. At first it just sounded weird to me. If I am the only one for your party or are the one you need in order to give the party, then why not? 😅

[plush pelican]

I'm asking about just "eine Party geben", does that work?

[warped oriole]

Yes those two words we say the most. Geben isn't really used.

[warped oriole]

Maybe. It's just rarely used that it sounds weird to me.

[vernal ermine]

I feel meaningwise it changes.

[warped oriole]

No

Ich lade Sie ein, um eine Party in meinem Haus zu veranstalten.

Um eine Party in meinem Haus zu veranstalten, lade ich Sie ein.

Both the same meaning

And I removed Ihnen and changed geben to veranstalten.

That would make more sense. Ich gebe dir eine Party is not used.

Ich veranstalte/schmeiße für dich eine Party.

[vernal ermine]

Is there any restrictions on the usage of Um zu in the first part? Or It is as free as used in second part.

[plush pelican]

What about having "um...zu..." clauses first in general? How often is that done/how natural is it?

[vernal ermine]

We both have same question 😇

[warped oriole]

It doesn't matter if the um zu part is first or after the comma. It doesn't change grammar wise or meang wise.

[warped oriole]

I think it's natural to do it. It's just what you want to say first.

[plush pelican]

Would you say "um...zu..." clauses are equally frequently the first clause versus the second?

I had the feeling that them being first was kind of rare.

[warped oriole]

Yeah I would say that we more often say the um zu part after the comma

[vernal ermine]

Does um zu only follows a specific tense?

[plush pelican]

Are you asking what tense the main clause can be in?

[vernal ermine]

Both the part of the sentence.

[warped oriole]

If someone says to me that I have to go home, I would respond with "um nach Hause zu gehen, muss ich erstmal ..."

But if I just want to tell someone something I would propably say it like this "Ich muss arbeiten gehen, um Geld zu verdienen."

Do you know what I mean?

[plush pelican]

Ich trainiere, um fit zu bleiben.
Ich habe trainiert, um fit zu bleiben.
Ich hatte trainiert, um fit zu bleiben, aber dann habe ich eine Verletzung bekommen.
Ich werde trainieren, um fit zu bleiben.
Ich werde trainiert haben, um fit zu bleiben.

[warped oriole]

But it doesn't really matter. You can always say the um zu part after the comma.

[plush pelican]

In other words, when the "um...zu..." Clause is itself the Topic, you put it in position 1 like any other topic.

Spielst du mit deinem Bruder?

Mit meinem Bruder spiele ich nicht. Er ist gemein

[warped oriole]

Like this. But we wouldn't really repeat it. We just would say yea or no. Nein. Er ist gemein.

I think you just put the part first you want to emphasize.

[vernal ermine]

@warped oriole You told umzu and um zu are different. Can I know what difference it is?

[warped oriole]

You never write just umzu. The umzu is fused with a verb. Like umzugehen, umzufahren. (umgehen, umfahren)
It's a different um the the zu comes after the um because of grammar rules.
You can have "umzufahren" und "zu umfahren". Both different meanings. It has something to do with separable and nonseparable verbs.

[vernal ermine]

I didn't find the umzufahren in dictionary I see only zufahren.

[vernal ermine]

When we use umzufahren?

[plush pelican]

In other words: "umzu" doesn't exist.

The only time you see something that looks like it is when you have a separable verb with the prefix "um", like the separable verb "umgehen"

When you use a separable verb in an Infinitivsatz (zu... Clause), you insert the "zu" between the prefix and the main part of the verb.

Ich hoffe, bald anzufangen.

Ich versuche, mit meinem Bruder gut umzugehen.

But this is a coincidence

[warped oriole]

Umfahren is the verb.
It's a tricky word and you don't really need to know it because you can say it with different words.

Ihn umzufahren ist eine Straftat.
To drive him over is a crime.

Ihn zu umfahren ist gut.
To drive around him is good.

You can also use different words like:

Ihn zu überfahren (umzufahren) ist eine Straftat. (This is literally drive over)

Argus can explain better then me. I just can say if it's right or wrong. For the most part

[vernal ermine]

Little confusing 😵

[plush pelican]

Certain prefixes can be either separable or inseparable.

For example "benutzen", be- is inseparable, and so the "zu" doesn't get put between the prefix and the main part of the verb

Ich versuche, DeepL zu benutzen.

[warped oriole]

Yes. It's not really important to learn. It's just a funny little confusing thing to know.

[plush pelican]

"um" can be either separable or inseparable, even depending on which meaning

Ich fahre ihn um = I drive over him.
Ich umfahre ihn = I drive around him.

[warped oriole]

I mean the difference between umzufahren and zu umfahren. But you should learn about seperable or inseperable verbs/prefixes.

[plush pelican]

Depending on the meaning, "um" may be separable (in which case, you put the "zu" in between the prefix and main part of the verb), or "um" might be inseparable (in which case, "zu" is before the entire verb.)

They are, basically, two different words

That look very similar

[vernal ermine]

I studied that part. I got confused because it don't know Whether you are using um zu in that?

[plush pelican]

No, there the "um" is from the verb "umfahren". It has nothing to do with "um...zu..."

Ich fahre langsam, um ihn zu umfahren.

[vernal ermine]

Does the second verb is inseparable verb?

[plush pelican]

I drive slowly, in order to drive around him.

[warped oriole]

Ich fahre schnell, um ihn umzufahren

[plush pelican]

In the meaning "to drive around somebody/something", "umfahren" is inseparable, yes.

[warped oriole]

I drive fast, in order to drive him over.

[plush pelican]

Here, he is using the other meaning where it is separable. And so the "zu" goes between the prefix and main part of the verb.

[warped oriole]

@vernal ermine sorry if I just confuse you

[vernal ermine]

it's normal, no problem.

I have some basic essential question. How we use the following verbs in the um zu format?

1. Separable verb with prefix with um / zu
   2.Inseparable verb with prefix with um / zu

[plush pelican]

1. Ich fahre schnell, um pünktlich anzukommen.
   I drive quickly, in order to arrive on time.

2. Ich fahre schnell, um die Polizei zu vermeiden.
   I drive quickly, in order to avoid the police.

Same idea as with a "zu..." clause

If the verb is separable, the "zu" is between the prefix and main part

If the verb is inseparable, the "zu" is in front of the verb.

[vernal ermine]

What about a verb with um/zu prefix?

[plush pelican]

It depends on the verb, as "um" can be either separable or inseparable

If that verb in that specific meaning is separable...you do it like any other separable verb

If that verb in that specific meaning is inseparable...you do it like any other inseparable verb

"an" is always separable.

"ver" is always inseparable.

"um" can be either, depending on the specific verb and the specific meaning.

Another prefix that can be either separable or inseparable is "über"

Ein Betrunkener hat meinen Hund überfahren.
A drunk ran over my dog.

Die Fähre hat ihn und seinen Wagen übergefahren.
The ferry conveyed him and his car.

(being separable or not also affects the Partitip 2 for the Perfekt tense)

[vernal ermine]

Can we use like , um mein Geschäft zuzufahren, benutze ich schlüssel. For zufahren

[plush pelican]

To drive your business?

[vernal ermine]

To close my shop

[plush pelican]

But yes, you can have a separable verb with "zu"

Un mein Geschäft zuzumachen, benutze ich den Schlüssel.

[warped oriole]

zuzuschließen

[warped oriole]

Or this

[vernal ermine]

Is there any different meaning for zufahren?

[plush pelican]

This website talks about different prefixes. Also click on the side for "inseparable prefixes" and "prefixes that are either separable or inseparable"

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~deutsch/Grammatik/Wortbildung/Separables.html

[long whale]

It does. 🌻

[near folio]

https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/zufahren

[plush pelican]

1. to drive with a car towards something
2. to go towards something (not necessarily driving)
3. rarely: to deliver something with a vehicle
4. colloquially: to drive faster

[warped oriole]

@vernal ermine
(um) mein Geschäft zu(zu)machen.
The ones in brackets belong to "um...zu".
As you now know the zu goes between zumachen because zumachen is seperable.

[long whale]

I just don't think using it with Dativ is really a thing. If I wanted to say I was going to throw a party in your honour, I'd go for "Ich gebe dir zu Ehren eine Party". 🌻 @plush pelican

[vernal ermine]

How to indentify in speech whether you are using um zu ( in order to) or umzu?

[plush pelican]

There is no "umzu"

The only time anything even looks like that is when you have a separable verb with the prefix "um"

Ich fahre schnell, um ihn umzufahren.

[vernal ermine]

Is it possible to write without um like zulesen or zufahren?

[plush pelican]

?

I think you are getting confused about separable verbs maybe?

[warped oriole]

zulesen and zufahren don't really exist or I never used them.

Zufahren exist

But I never used it.

[vernal ermine]

I am ok with um zu and separable verbs

[plush pelican]

zumachen = to close

Ich mache die Tür zu.
Ich habe die Tür zugemacht.
Ich versuche, die Tür zuzumachen.
Ich brauche Hilfe, um die Tür zuzumachen

[plush pelican]

Does this help, or what are you asking?

[vernal ermine]

Can we omit um in that um zu format? Like I play games in order to relax -> I play games to relax.

[plush pelican]

No

I don't think?

[deep venture]

may i ask what app this is?

[plush pelican]

It's not like English, where you can omit "in order"

[plush pelican]

The website Dict.cc

[deep venture]

thank you

[warped oriole]

No you can't. You need the um(in order) zu(to)

[vernal ermine]

I understand now

@warped oriole Vielen Dank ❤

@plush pelican Vielen Dank❤

[scarlet lynx]

Can someone help me understand where these da-compound (e.g davon, dafür, dagegen) words are usually put in a sentence? I just can't see any answers on google on where to put them in the German sentence structure

[long whale]

I'd warmly recommend watching a video on da-compounds, for example. See, the problem is, several of those da-words are words in their own right, with one or more particular meanings of their own. And their purpose is the decisive element in placing them. If you translate the 3 example sentences for "dabei", you'll find "dabei" translates to 3 entirely different things. 🌻

[dire totem]

@warped oriole

[terse sail]

Sorry i already tried deepl and some other translates but I couldn’t be sure

Was bedeutet einschätzen

Is it like raten

But I guess there’s a difference

[long whale]

https://de.pons.com/übersetzung/deutsch-englisch/einschätzen ought to help (as dictionaries often do) 🌻

Using automated translation systems like deepl to find out about single words is very much like using the hedge cutters to trim your eyebrows. It's simply not what they're for.

[terse sail]

Sorry for the misunderstanding but by translates I meant dictionaries

I have already tried pons

[long whale]

Okay... so, where's the problem? Did you find a sentence where you feel none of the translations suggested by Pons make any sense?

[terse sail]

I tried pons chat gpt (tried it with making a sentence) and another deutsch dictionary and before I asked here I wanted to try deepl

[terse sail]

Chat Gpt says it’s not like raten but explains it in a weird way that I couldn’t understand

Our teacher has translated it different than this meaning I’m also going to ask him tomorrow

[faint atlas]

There are 2 meaning of "raten". One is the noun, "Die Raten". This is related to banking. The other meaning is the verb "raten" which means guessing. Einschätzen means to estimate or evaluate something.

Does that answer your question?

[long whale]

I don't know what "pons chat gpt" is/means. 🤷 And I really don't know what kind of help you'd like us to provide, I'm afraid.

[terse sail]

Pons, chat gpt

Sorry

[long whale]

Yeah, well, might as well use a 🔮 instead of ChatGPT.

[terse sail]

I guess

Ok relax

[warped oriole]

Einschätzen = evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of someone/something.
Maybe like this?

Ich kann nicht einschätzen, ob der dunkle Weg gefährlich ist.
I cannot judge whether the dark path is dangerous. (Here it's more like judge)

Ich kann ihn nicht einschätzen.
(This is more like estimating, evaluating the nature or the ability of someone.)
Maybe he is a bad person? (Nature of him)
Maybe he can't sing very well? (His ability)
Ich weiß nicht, ich kann ihn nicht einschätzen.

[terse sail]

OHHH thank you 🙂

Now i get it

[delicate pawn]

I asked this before but ig it was overshadowed by the other question

What does "mal" in "Du müsstest mal aufräumen!" mean?

[south zenith]

It’s a modal particle and doesn’t mean anything but conveys a feeling/tone, generally one more casual than assertive

[bold ore]

Adding to this, mal here is similar to einmal or irgendwann mal, so you're talking about how someone has to / should clean up in the near future. It is just like "filler word" but if you would say "du müsstest aufräumen" without the mal it would sound (depending on the context) like when you come in the room of your child who should be cleaning up and is doing nothing. You should be cleaning up. Or it would sound like it's connected to another cause, and only then you will have to do it. "du müsstest aufräumen, wenn (if) (...)". With Du müsstest mal aufräumen the meaning is more clear

[vernal ermine]

Kannst du mir helfen, die Wäsche aufzuhängen?

Is this sentence correct?

[vernal ermine]

Can you tell me how aufzuhängen is coming instead of aufhängen?

[long whale]

Some verbs and expressions require an infinitive with "zu". "helfen" is one of them.

[vague rain]

Hallo zusammen. Es ist bald ein halbes Jahr seit ich Deutsch gelernt habe. I am satisfied with the amount of German I can now understand, but I'm very insecure with how much I can speak and write. I am concerned that I've forgotten a lot of which I have already learnt. I often struggle with composing longer sentences. I am however still very motivated and want to try to reach my goal. Do you guys have any tips for strenghtening the "base" of my German knowledge?

[wise pendant]

regular input, meaning watching youtube, tv, reading books, articles, listening to podcasts, conversing with Germans etc but doing it regularly and daily to train your brain. The more German you consume on a regular basis the better your brain is going to restructure itself to make you able to use the language yourself.
So make reading and listening to German part of your daily routine.

And allow yourself to ramble to yourself in German. Loudly talking with yourself in German over stuff you just read or listened to, without having the stress to say certain things. Just say what your brain gives you.

[vague rain]

vielen dank 🙂 I do the second and the more I learn the easier that obviously becomes. I haven't really gotten into watching or listening things in German because of how little I've understood of it in the past, aber das ist ein guter Ratschlag!

[plush pelican]

Reddit.com/r/WriteStreakGerman

You can post 1 post there per day and get it corrected by native speakers.

Definitely work on writing each day, if writing is a weakness.

[plain umbra]

Listening is a tricky skill because it's slow to develop. You first start out just barely learning how to tell apart sounds and words and you have to practice that for a while before you get to the point of understanding sentences. So don't worry that you don't understand at first - the first step is only to hear some words, so if you can do that, you're doing well already.

[vague rain]

vielen Dank 🙂 das klingt gut

[vague rain]

thank you! i'll take my time and hopefully improve 😄

[snow edge]

how to say 'not right now' in german?

[vernal ermine]

Thanks 😇 but how to find those type of verbs and expressions?

[long whale]

By googling "Infinitiv mit zu" or "German infinitive with zu"

[long whale]

https://www.deepl.com/translator#en/de/Not right now.

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank 🤝

[vague rain]

hallo, just to make sure ... is gehen what makes welche take the akkusativ form in the following sentence? "in welche Richtung müssen wir gehen?"

[plush pelican]

Pretty accurate

[plush pelican]

yes

https://youtu.be/auWRmuw_AcY?si=yoXrKJYLfMul6Apt

[vague rain]

vielen Dank 🙂

[vernal ermine]

Letzte Woche habe ich die Wäsche gewaschen und aufgehängt. Eigentlich hat meine Schwester mir geholfen. Dann habe ich meine Wohnung geputzt. Jeden Tag fege ich den Boden im Wohnzimmer. Jeden Sonntag wische ich mein Schlafzimmer.

@long whale Is this correct? My own writing.

Vielen Dank 🤝 @long whale

While writing first I got confused with position of the subject. Can you tell me which words takes 0 position in a sentence? @long whale

[plush pelican]

"mir" before "meine Schwester"

Pronouns generally precede full nouns

[plush pelican]

Coordinating conjunctions, mainly (und, oder, aber, sondern, etc.)

There's probably something else, but I'm not thinking of it right now

[plush pelican]

Reading Die Stadt der Träumenden Bücher and it has this line:

Die Neugier ist der Grund dafür, daß Kinder die Hand ins Feuer halten.

Accusative with halten? Why? Is the act of not moving the hand associated with a state change?

Can "halten" mean the opposite of "halten"? To put something somewhere?

[whole portal]

Yeah etw. wo hin halten means to hold something in a position

Er hält die Hand ins Feuer = he puts his hand into the fire

[plush pelican]

But... You're not moving it. It's not going anywhere. It's undergoing no change of state.

Why would that mean accusative?

[whole portal]

You're moving your hand for it to be there

[plush pelican]

That's not "holding", then

You don't "hold" something into a position

[whole portal]

Well you do in German .-.

[plush pelican]

You hold something in a position, that is already in that position

I'm holding you doesn't mean I'm putting you somewhere

[whole portal]

Halten sie ihre Karte auf den Scanner 🥰

[plush pelican]

If I hold a pen, I'm not moving it

Doesn't German have this meaning of "halten" as well, to keep something in the same position?

[whole portal]

Yes

But it also uses it for bringing something into that state

[plush pelican]

So "halten" can in fact be the opposite of "halten"?

😵‍💫

[whole portal]

no not really

If you waved your hand over the fire that wouldn't be halten

[plush pelican]

Keeping something in the same position versus moving something into a position

You're saying "halten" =

1. keeping something in the same position

2. moving something to a position, and THEN keeping it in that same position?

[whole portal]

I see your point but I don't think thinking about halten as describing a movement helps

[whole portal]

Yes

[plush pelican]

But you yourself described it as a movement

"put your hand into the fire"

[whole portal]

If it was "hold it over the flames" would that not imply to move it if it's not yet over the flames?

[plush pelican]

🤔

It would mean to keep it over the flames. If it's not already over the flames, it implies a separate movement to put it there, I guess, but that movement is not a part of "hold", I don't think

[whole portal]

Yeah and I would argue that the movement is implied with halten here as well but not necessarily part of halten itself

[plush pelican]

Actually let's look this up in a dictionary

[whole portal]

I found

etwas durch Kraftausübung in Ruhe belassen oder bringen

So yeah something is kept in position sonewhere, be it by leaving it there or moving it there

[plush pelican]

I meant in English

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hold

The only thing I see here involving movement is this definition

[whole portal]

Oh

[plush pelican]

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hold

Well now I look here and the first thing seems to imply movement

[plush pelican]

To take AND keep something in your hand or arms

[whole portal]

I'm trying to think if this applies to similar verbs

[plush pelican]

This one is even more explicit, but here "hold" is always paired with a directional thing like "out" or "up"

[whole portal]

Well halten is too, no?

[plush pelican]

ins Feuer halten?

"in" is acting directional here, then?

[whole portal]

in+Akk is creating the movement here, no?

[plush pelican]

🤔

[whole portal]

Die Hand übers Feuer halten would have movement too hm

[plush pelican]

The thing is, this kind of difference is basically irrelevant in English because of our lack of cases, but it becomes intensely important in German.

It's like learning that you need to count the number of syllables in each sentence, because it's wrong if you end with an odd number of syllables.

Yes, we have syllables, and yes, you could count them, but it wasn't important or necessary to do so.

[whole portal]

Halten without any in or an or sth will never be a movement I think

[plush pelican]

We will often say "in" instead of "into", because it doesn't matter for us.

But those symbolize "in + dative" versus "in + akk" in German

[whole portal]

I mean in is especially bad when it comes to this sort of stuff because it behaves quite different depending on used with Akk. or Dat. right?

Yeah

I see this a lot here

[plush pelican]

Here, in this server?

[whole portal]

Yes

People getting confused because using the wrong case often totally changes the meaning of the verb

esp. with kommen .-.

[plush pelican]

[whole portal]

On the other hand just using in for everything is a common mistake of Germans speaking English

[plush pelican]

Example?

[whole portal]

I guess it's even more confusing because it works sometimes but sometimes you really should be using into

[whole portal]

Well saying something like "I went in the house" instead of "I went into the house"

[plush pelican]

🤔

I don't feel like that's really an issue

[whole portal]

Hm, maybe it isn't

There's probably more blatant ones but I can't think of much, I'm just pretty sure I've noticed this with some people

[plush pelican]

To run into someone

[whole portal]

My mom is learning english right now, it's somewhat painful for me to listen to

[plush pelican]

"I ran in him" makes me confused what you're saying

[whole portal]

I always thought the super over the top german accent people do is just a joke ... it's not

[plush pelican]

To be into something.

"I am in sports" = I work in the sports industry.

"I am into sports" = I like sports as a hobby.

[plush pelican]

Stereotypes often have a kernel of truth

[whole portal]

yeah I was also thinking about something like "getting into sth" but you wouldn't really use "in" for that in German

Well I'm going to the UK in march let's hope I don't embarrass myself

Pretty sure my spoken english was a lot better a few years ago when I would actually talk to people in English online

[plush pelican]

How bad can it be, given you use the internet in English daily?

Another question from a line from the book:

Nur wenige Meter über mir stand der Harpyr in der Luft.

Apparently, one can "stand" in the air? In English, standing implies you are holding yourself upright with your legs.

[vernal ermine]

Why bro mir is coming before the subject?

[vernal ermine]

Apart from conjunction, is there something that does take '0' position.

[plush pelican]

As I said before, pronouns generally come before full nouns, regardless of whether something is the subject or not.

This has to do with "alt vor neu", "old before new", do you know this idea of German word order?

[vernal ermine]

No, I am hearing this for the first time.

[plush pelican]

In German, there are many tendencies. They are called tendencies rather than "rules", because they are very loose and often overrule each other, depending on the circumstances

One tendency is "old before new".

The idea here is that older/less important information should be near the front of the sentence, and
newer/more important information should be near the back of the sentence

When you are using a pronoun, that means you have already talked about the noun once before in a previous sentence. That means that this thing is already known. Thus it is somewhat older/less important information, so it goes towards the front of the sentence.

The same idea is true of nouns with definite articles versus nouns with indefinite articles

If I see a dog for the first time, I might say, "Da ist ein Hund"

If I see the dog again, I might say, "Da ist der Hund von gestern."

The first time, when it is new, I use "ein".

The second time, when it is already known, I use "der"

And so in a sentence, you tend to put nouns with an indefinite article later in the sentence and nouns with a definite article earlier in the sentence, because old information is front of sentence, and new information is end of sentence.

[vernal ermine]

I understand now. I try a sentence: Ich und mein Freund reisen zu Paris. Wahrend meines Reisen haben wir einem Junge die Schokolade geschenkt. In this sentence have I used the old and new information correctly? @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

Well, the idea is to have indefinite article stuff (ein/eine/etc) later/towards the end of the sentence, and definite article stuff (der/die/etc) earlier/towards the beginning of the sentence.

Also, I think for cities, you use "nach".

Ich reise nach Paris.

[vernal ermine]

I think my sentence is wrong.

[plush pelican]

Yeah, Switch the position of the nouns

[vernal ermine]

Ich und mein Freund reisen nach Paris. Während meines Reisens haben wir die Schokolade einem Junge geschenkt. Now is it correct? @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

"Während unserer Reise"

But otherwise, I think so

A lot of verbs have a specific noun like "die Reise"; they are very annoying to remember, because there is no simple rule for going from the verb to the noun, 😄

backen = to bake
das Gebäck = baked good

[vernal ermine]

I have one question bro? I studied like dative object ( einem Junge) comes before akkusative object ( die Schokolade). Why it is not applying here.

@plush pelican

[plush pelican]

That applies if they have the same level of "newness", so if they both have a definite article or both have an indefinite article

Ich gebe dem Jungen die Schokolade

The same thing happens if one thing is a pronoun and the other is a full noun

Ich habe eine Schokolade.

Ich gebe sie dem Jungen.
Ich gebe sie einem Jungen.

Pronoun = older information, so not the same level of "newness", so it goes first, despite being in accusative case.

[vernal ermine]

But here dem Junge is in the second position ( last) which is having definite article. How?

[plush pelican]

Pronoun = oldest information
Definite article = old information
Indefinite article = new information

A noun with a definite article is still newer than a pronoun, so it comes after a pronoun

@vernal ermine Here is one suggested "neutral word order". Note all the different places

pronomen are up near the front, then "Nomen im Dativ definit" and then "Nomen im Akkusativ definit"

and then towards the end, "Nomen im Dativ indefinit" and then "Nomen im Akkusativ indefinit"

(also note: if everything is a pronoun, the order is: Nominativ, then Akkusativ, then Dativ, so if everything is a pronoun, you don't do "Dative before Accusative")

In other words: "Dative before Accusative" only applies to full nouns

and only if they have the same level of "newness"

[vernal ermine]

I understand now better.

[vernal ermine]

Bro I would like to know about the 0 position words @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

Yeah, Let me think about it for a minute

So, Hammer's German Grammar has this section, 19.2.1(c), where they talk about "exceptions to the rule that only 1 thing comes before the conjugated verb"

It is quite long, but here you go if you want to read through it.

I will try to summarize it for you as well:

1. You can have interjections before the sentence starts:

Ja, du hast Recht

Here, "ja" is an interjection. It is sort of its own separate thing, apart from the sentence.

2. There are some other words that are sort of like connectors, but they are not conjunctions. They link up sentences, but they are separated with a comma from the actual sentence

Es regnet immer am Sonntag. Ich hasse es, wenn es regnet. Mit anderen Worten, ich hasse Sonntage.
It always rains on Sunday. I hate it when it rains. In other words, I hate Sundays.

"erstens, zweitens, etc" are also a part of this group

3. A certain type of Nebensatz doesn't count as being in position 1, meaning the Hauptsatz afterwards doesn't change its word order.

Normal Nebensatz: Wenn du Schokolade magst, solltest du Schokolade essen.
"solltest" is right after the comma, because (wenn du Schokolade magst) is all considered as being in "position 1" of the Hauptsatz. "solltest" is then in position 2, and "du" is in position 3.

Special Nebensatz: Wie schnell er auch lief, der Polizist holte ihn ein
However fast he ran, the cop caught him.

"der Polizist" appears right after the comma here, because the special Nebensatz isn't affecting word order of the Hauptsatz. "der Polizist" is in position 1, "holte" is in position 2, "ihn" is in position 3

These special types of Nebensätze are complicated; read the Hammer's German Grammar thing for more.

4. You can sometimes have an emphasized element separate from the sentence, and then refer back to it with a pronoun or "das" or "da" or something.

Als ich davon hörte, da war es schon zu spät
As I heard of it, there it was already too late (this doesn't really make sense in English, FYI)

Der Nachbar, der hat uns ja immer davon abhalten wollen
The neighbor, he always wanted to stop us from doing it.

So yeah, technically most of these are like, separate little mini-clauses.

[vernal ermine]

I too feel, this part complicated.

[plush pelican]

yeah, 😅 I haven't fully mastered this part myself

[vernal ermine]

I got some Ideas now @plush pelican

Yesterday I did an exercise, I have also one question.

Wenn ich glücklich bin, gebe ich eine Party zu meinen Freunden. Does my sentence correct?

[plush pelican]

Didn't we talk about this before? Usually, you would use the verb "eine Party schmeißen" or "eine Party veranstalten"

"Wenn ich glücklich bin, schmeiße ich eine Party für meine Freunde."

Or something like that

Idk about "geben", but the native speaker the other day seemed to think it didn't work like you were using it

[vernal ermine]

Yeah bro but my question was different.

[plush pelican]

You need to ask a native speaker on this; I'm not sure

[vernal ermine]

I want a sentence with zu preposition + noun. Can you give one sentence? @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

Ich gratuliere dir zu deinem Geburtstag.

I congratulate you on your birthday.

[long whale]

Argus, afaik, the endings on "Junge" are non-optional: dem Jungen

[vernal ermine]

Ich gratuliere dir zu deinem Geburtstag und deinem Hochzeitstag. Does (zu ) dative rule / akkusative rule applies also on the second noun followed by the same preposition?

[plush pelican]

You can also do the thing where it's "zum + nominalized verb" = "um zu + verb"

Ich mache Sport, um zu trainieren.
Ich mache Sport zum Trainieren.

[plush pelican]

I swear I did it on the first sentence. I just got wrapped up and forgot it later...

[long whale]

... gebe ich eine Party für meine Freunde OR für meine Freunde eine Party

[plush pelican]

yes, because you are essentially repeating the entire sentence, and omitting everything except the part that is different.

Ich gratuliere dir zu deinem Geburtstag und (ich gratuliere dir zu) deinem Hochzeitstag.

[plush pelican]

How often would you say "gebe eine Party" versus "schmeiße eine Party"?

[long whale]

As a side note: zum Geburtstag/Hochzeitstag is what we usually say (I guess because we couldn't very well congratulate someone on the occ. of another person's birthday)

[long whale]

I don't throw parties, ever. But it seems the non-colloquial version to me. 🥳

[plush pelican]

"gebe" seems to be the non-colloquial version for you?

what about "veranstalte"?

Another native suggested that

[long whale]

Possible.

[plush pelican]

Would you prefer one over the other?

Or is one more common than the other?

[vernal ermine]

Bro, if we use und zu deinem Hochzeitstag instead of und deinem Hochzeitstag in the same sentence. Does it also correct ?

[long whale]

Come to think of it, in daily speech I just say "eine Party machen"

[plush pelican]

"Is it also correct?"

I mean, why ask me when we have a native right here, 😅

My instinct is it's right but unnecessary repeating of information?

[long whale]

#questions-2 message

[vernal ermine]

@long whale ?

[vernal ermine]

I didn't understand what you are telling?

[plush pelican]

More generally, even if we ignore the "zum" business: can you repeat the preposition in situations like these?

Ich danke dir für das Geschenk und (für) deine Anwesenheit?

[vernal ermine]

But if we use oder instead of und, does it applies?

In English we tell like - Can I give this pen to you or to your brother?

[long whale]

Feels fine to me. In a formal thank-you note, I think I'd very likely repeat the prep.

[plush pelican]

and if the conjunction is "oder", does that change anything?

[obtuse steppe]

We're not allowed to correct people's English without their permission.

[long whale]

Fährst du nach Paris oder nach Rom?

[plush pelican]

So with "oder", repeating the preposition actually becomes necessary?

[vernal ermine]

Can I follow this pattern?

[plush pelican]

Bereitest du dich auf die Goethe-Prüfung vor oder (auf) die TestDaF-Prüfung?

[vernal ermine]

Why vor comes before oder?

[long whale]

Totally unsure about necessary. But apparently, it's what I do. 🤔

[plush pelican]

Because I'm not sure where to put it, 😅

[long whale]

*dich

[vernal ermine]

I didn't get your point.

[plush pelican]

Should "vor" go here, or at the end of everything, or are both possible?

[long whale]

Well, fwiw, it's where I'd put it, too.

[plush pelican]

She meant that the combination is "sich auf etwas vorbereiten", you must have the reflexive pronoun. I forgot it in my sentence.

[plush pelican]

Could you put it at the end?

DeepL puts it at the end

[long whale]

Of course.

[plush pelican]

I have a feeling this is a Nachfeld situation

whether to, what do you call it, "enclose" it into the sentence or not

like with comparisons

[long whale]

We've just gone kind of off the idea it's brilliant to have the prefix dangling at the end of a long sentence. Maybe Mark Twain had that effect on us. 😄

[plush pelican]

I like the fact that when you start doing all the things colloquial German does, the sentences start looking more and more like English word order, 😛

Anyway, danke Susana 🙏

[vernal ermine]

I didn't understand what was told.

[merry heron]

Hallo ! Wie geht's?

[long whale]

zu deinem Geburtstag -> zum Geburtstag

[vernal ermine]

But why it is so?

How do we know whose birthday is it?

[long whale]

"Hi Ben! I congratulate you on your father's birthday." -> 🤯

[vernal ermine]

You understand my question wrongly. I mean like if we use zum Geburtstag instead of zu deinem Geburtstag as you told then how we know whose birthday it is?

[plush pelican]

She means that it is self-evident whose birthday it is, based on who you are speaking to

You only ever congratulate someone on their own birthday, so if you congratulate someone on a birthday, the German language simply assumes that it is that person's birthday.

so "Ich gratuliere dir zum Geburtstag" = I congratulate you on (your) birthday.

[vernal ermine]

I understand now but if we tell your birthday do they think it is as rude?

[plush pelican]

I don't think so, I think it just sounds a little "off", it doesn't sound idiomatic

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank ❤ @plush pelican

Vielen Dank 🤝 @long whale

[sand locust]

Hallo alle, könnt jemand mir helfen, dazu 'mit' bei nutzen verstehen?

Könnt "mit" auch "until" in Englisch bedeuten, oder?

[warped oriole]

Nein mit≠until
until=bis
Ich werde bis morgen nicht beginnen zu arbeiten.
I wil until tomorrow not beginn to work. (Word for word translation)
But we phrase it differently in german. We say literally:
Ich werde nicht mit der Arbeit beginnen.
I will not with the work beginn. (Again word for word)

and the "erst" means that you start from this time.
Ich werde erst morgen beginnen.
I will (erst=not earlier than) tomorrow beginn.

[rotund basin]

Mein Haus hat ein Arbeitzimmer wo ich an meinem Laptop Arbeite

is this correct ?

[cosmic rose]

That's really good! Just put a "s" after "Arbeit", so it's written as "Arbeitszimmer". And put a comma (,) between "Arbeitszimmer" and "wo". "Arbeite" is a verb, so it's not written with a capital letter.

Mein Haus hat ein Arbeitszimmer, wo ich an meinem Laptop arbeite.

For an alternative spelling (if you want to) you could use "in dem" instead of "wo". But that's just an option.

Mein Haus hat ein Arbeitszimmer, in dem ich an meinem Laptop arbeite.

Nevertheless, I would like to emphasize that you have already formed the sentence very well beforehand. 👍

[rotund basin]

thanks a lot for the detailed comment

[cosmic rose]

I'm glad that I could help you 🙂

[whole portal]

I feel like making the correct phonemes takes some training/muscle memory/being used to, if you don't use the english phonemes for a long time you need to use them for a bit before being really comfortable with them

[plush pelican]

What are "the English phonemes"? TH? Are there others that don't exist in German?

[whole portal]

the r, the w, the generally slightly different vowels

and some combinations that are less common in German

[plush pelican]

Someone on r/German the other day was claiming that ä in "hätte" was the same vowel as in the English "hat"

and I was like, "whuuuuu"

[whole portal]

I mean

The a in english hat can be pronounced in like 5 different ways depending on your dialect

[plush pelican]

Yeah, but only the most obscure dialect would pronounce it that differently

[whole portal]

Germans will often just say hät 🤷‍♀️

[plush pelican]

and then I asked for an example, and they linked a video of someone clearly NOT saying it like that

[whole portal]

lol

[acoustic breach]

Sorry
Isn't it pronounced like that? 😅

[plush pelican]

the English word "hat"? No, it isn't pronounced like "hät"

[whole portal]

Is it valid to say that english is generally spoken more towards the back of the mouth?

Compared to German

[plush pelican]

I have no idea, I mainly have learned my pronounciation by mimicking what I hear, not by knowing where my tongue actually is

[whole portal]

Unless you speak like miss sophie

[acoustic breach]

I think it's also hard to talk about English pronunciation because of it being spoken in so many places, and so many accents/pronunciation (like English and American already has difference in pronunciation in their vowels)

For me, hät and hat makes no difference 😅

[plush pelican]

Where are you from?

[acoustic breach]

Malaysia

[plush pelican]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMUgmaNtN2k

[plush pelican]

And is English a native language for you?

[acoustic breach]

Even if I am a "native English speaker" the way we pronounce it here is probably different due to many influences

[acoustic breach]

I dont know, because I spoke English since young but not with proper grammar

[plush pelican]

https://voca.ro/1mrudSuLbh3h

[acoustic breach]

Ok i hear it now

But i grew up speaking hät 😅

[plush pelican]

https://tenor.com/view/the-more-you-know-gif-26317296

[acoustic breach]

Now i feel like we dont speak like "hät" and now im confused with my English please excuse me while I think about it

[plush pelican]

https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/regional/berlin/rbb-wedding-berliner-hochschule-fuer-technik-meldet-cyberattacke-100.html

Die Berliner Hochschule für Technik (BHT) ist von einer Cyberattacke betroffen. Die Webseite ist aktuell nicht erreichbar und der E-Mailverkehr ist von Störungen betroffen. Die BHT sprach am Dienstagabend von einem "Sicherheitsvorfall". Es werde eine Ransomware (wörtlich: Lösegeld-Software)-Attacke vermutet, hieß es.

"Wir werden haben eine Spezialfirma beauftragt, sich um den Sicherheitsvorfall zu kümmern", sagte BHT-Präsidentin Julia Neuhaus am Mittwoch rbb|24. Nach einer Krisensitzung habe man sich entschieden, Stück für Stück die IT-Systeme neuaufzusetzen.

What is going on in this sentence? Is this Futur 2 but with "haben" in a totally weird place? Is there some usage of the Nachfeld in this sentence?

[delicate tiger]

editing mistake "Wir ~~werden ~~haben eine Spezialfirma beauftragt"

[plush pelican]

This is the fun game I play every time: Have I discovered a mistake, or is there a wholly new grammar concept that I'm just stumbling upon?

[long whale]

I'd say "schwebte" might have been a more common option. As to "stehen", you know we use it for anything written anywhere, don't you?

[plush pelican]

Wait, what are you responding to?

The line after that about the harpy "standing" in the air?

It wasn't the word "harpy" in the air

it was a creature, floating in the air

[long whale]

Yup - I just remembered I'd meant to comment on it this morning, but then, life happened/questions were asked. 😄

[plush pelican]

with wings and bird-legs

[long whale]

Ehh - yes. I had assumed it was the creature floating in the air. I just added the other because you'd said sth about "being held upright by one's legs". And yes, Argus, I have a surprisingly large vocab. I do know what a harpy is. 😄

[plush pelican]

But...what does stehen being used for writing have to do with the example?

I mean, yes, "stehen" is not just used for "being held upright by one's legs", but this is something different than that or being in written text

I'm trying to understand:

1. If this makes sense to use "stehen" in this context, and
2. If so, why?

[long whale]

1st line under BEISPIELE: https://www.dwds.de/wb/Hubschrauber

[plush pelican]

so "stehen" can be used in this context

[long whale]

As to 2) - what can I say? I guess we just use it when something isn't moving. I mean, we also say "Das Auto steht auf dem Parkplatz an der Kirche".

[plush pelican]

I guess the English conception of "stand" is much more anthropomorphic and tied to actual legs

You wouldn't talk about a car "standing" in a parking lot, either

Weirdly enough, you could talk about it sitting there, though

[long whale]

Remember that thing about things which clearly have a "this side up"? Like a vase, a glass, a bottle or a plate? All diese Dinge stehen irgendwo. Genau wie Bücher im Regal.

[plush pelican]

I've just thought of one time when you don't need legs-- "standing water". But that's like a fixed phrase, you wouldn't say "The water is standing there"

[plush pelican]

Now that you mention it, I do remember that, 😅

But at least there they are still having their bottom part touch a surface

to say that something is "standing" in the air, where it is touching nothing, is a whole other level

So that's another part of "standing" in English--it implies that the thing is in contact with a surface

a surface underneath of the thing

[long whale]

I think the problem is: German lacks a good verb for "to hover". I mean, there's "schweben", but this also means "to float", i.e. [slow] movement: https://de.pons.com/übersetzung/englisch-deutsch/hover

[whole portal]

Sterne stehen am Himmel

[plush pelican]

https://tenor.com/view/jackie-chan-meme-what-confused-huh-gif-9211712295268335918

[vernal ermine]

Letzte Woche habe ich mein Schulfreund getroffen. Zuerst haben wir über unser Leben geredet. Dann haben wir im Restaurant gegessen. Danach haben wir einen Film im Kino gesehen. Endlich sind wir in den Park gegangen.

Does my writing correct?

[whole portal]

This is pretty much the default verb for this I am afraid

[charred harbor]

The mein in the first sentence is the wrong case

[vernal ermine]

Ok I use meinen there.

@charred harbor how other sentences are?

[charred harbor]

Well my English brain is really wanting to suggest “unsere Leben” though that could easily be English interference so I’m not confident

The grammar is good

Naturalness I’ll leave to someone more qualified

[acoustic breach]

Did you coincidently meet your friend, or have you planned to meet together?

[vernal ermine]

Coincidently

[acoustic breach]

Ah ok then no problem with the verb "treffen"

[vernal ermine]

Bro, what you think? @plush pelican

[plush pelican]

I'm not sure if "endlich" works there. It might, or it might not. I don't know.

[long whale]

Yup, English brain, English interference. 🍪

[charred harbor]

My spidey senses are working at least!

[long whale]

It does. It's just a little uncommon/literary.

[plush pelican]

What would be a more common way to end a list?

schließlich? schlussendlich? letztendlich? zuletzt?

German has...so many words that roughly equate to "finally" 😵‍💫

[long whale]

zum Schluss is what I'd have said. 😄

But any of the above will do, I'd say.

[plush pelican]

Really? 😮

[long whale]

Well, I guess there are nuances (and sometimes other meanings, too), but in the text, I'd say the situation is just not specific enough to make me prefer one over the other. 🤔

[vernal ermine]

I go with Zum Schluss. Apart from it, does my sentences are good?

[warped oriole]

Letzte Woche habe ich meinen Schulfreund getroffen. Zuerst haben wir über unser Leben geredet, dann haben wir im Restaurant gegessen und danach haben wir einen Film im Kino gesehen (maybe geschaut or geguckt is more common?). Zum Schluss sind wir in den Park gegangen.

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank ❤

[plush pelican]

Question: How do you build Konjunktiv 2 in Passiv in the present tense when the verb is "werden" as a full verb?

In my practice workbook, the exercise said to take the sentences and put them into passive:

Zunächst werden die Nutzer nur nervös. Langsam wird deutlich, dass Teile der Kommunikation nicht mehr funktionieren.

The given answer:

Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös. Langsam würde deutlich, dass Teile der Kommunikation nicht mehr funktionieren würden.

Idk, seems weird to have "würde" on its own like that in the first two parts.

[bold ore]

I'm not expert on grammar but I think I would use wären instead of würden.
Otherwise, bc I'm not quite sure if it's passiv then, I think maybe you can use würden werden. So as an example zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös werden.
But if someone is an expert on grammar maybe they can help

[kind knoll]

when you have two separate clauses or actions, each requiring the Konjunktiv 2 form, you need to use "würden" for each of them separately which is why its repeated

[gloomy tartan]

Indikativ Putin behauptete, die Ukraine hat keine Munition

K1 Putin behauptete, die Ukraine habe keine Munition
K2 Putin behauptete, die Ukraine hätte keine Munition

Can somebody translate these sentences into English? I have a German friend who says they all have the same meaning, but the way I've been taught the conjunctive, K2 has a different meaning

[plush pelican]

I think you misunderstand my issue.

Take the first sentence on its own.

Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös.

To me, it sounds weird that there isn't a "werden" on the end there.

[kind knoll]

Huh? why would there be? "würden" is the subjunctive form of the verb "werden" The verb "würden" already implies the future tense, so adding "werden" again at the end of the sentence would be redundant and grammatically incorrect

[plush pelican]

Konjunktiv 1 is often replaced with Konjunktiv 2 whenever Konjunktiv 1 ends up being identical to normal Indikativ.

The problem is, Konjunktiv 1 ends up looking identical to normal Indikativ most of the time.

So then you end up basically constantly using Konjunktiv 2 when you mean Konjunktiv 1, except for 3rd person singular, where Konjunktiv 1 is still distinct from Indikativ.

But then native speakers end up even using Konjunktiv 2 there as well sometimes colloquially.

[plush pelican]

Not talking about future tense, but present tense

How do you translate

Die Nutzer würden nervös

into English?

[kind knoll]

Users would get nervous or users would be nervous

[plush pelican]

Now, how do you translate

Die Nutzer würden nervös werden

?

[kind knoll]

also the users would get nervous

[plush pelican]

Now you see the problem

English doesn't seem capable of distinguishing between these

"Users would be nervous" is "die Nutzer wären nervös", btw

[kind knoll]

I do I do, to me it sounds like in the one that ends with werden it implies a process or a change in the state of the users. Initially, they are not nervous, but something would happen to make them nervous, while the one with only würden implies a state of being for the users, that they are already in a state of nervousness or would be in a state of nervousness under certain conditions you know?

but thats just how it sounds like to me

[plush pelican]

But they undergo a change in both

This is passive for both

Das Haus wird gebaut.

The house is in a process of change

Das Haus würde gebaut.

Oh wait, that's different, because "werden" isn't a full verb there?

[kind knoll]

Die Nutzer würden nervös werden is not passive though

[plush pelican]

😵‍💫

[plush pelican]

Why?

[kind knoll]

What makes you think it is passive?

[plush pelican]

"werden"

It needs a Partizip 2 to be Vorgangspassiv, you mean?

[kind knoll]

Well, I can see where you're coming from, but I see werden as an infinitive verb after the modal verb würden you know? the users would become nervous

[plush pelican]

This whole thing is confusing

[kind knoll]

Susana if you can hear us please save us

[plush pelican]

But I feel like if I can crack it, it's the last real big grammar I have left

I think you're right that it's not passive

At least, not Vorgangspassiv

[kind knoll]

I am really leaning into the not passive side

Have you asked Susana?

[plush pelican]

And for Zustandspassiv Konjunktiv 2, I think it needs to be wären instead of würden

[plush pelican]

I posted the question here, didn't I? 😛

[kind knoll]

I suppose she's bound to see it, but such a complicated question may only be answered by pferd and susana

and pferd is rarely active

Do let me know if you find an answer

[plush pelican]

Is there another way of translating "Die Nutzer würden nervös"?

Or do you know how to translate it in another language?

[kind knoll]

In Arabic yes

the users will become nervous

but thats just würden plus werden though in german..

You got me fucked up

[gloomy tartan]

Vielen Dank! Ist es übrigens möglich, K1 und K2 im selben Satz zu benutzen?

[plush pelican]

If you have 2 clauses of reported speech and only one of the verbs has to be replaced, yes

[gloomy tartan]

Okay, could you give me an example? I tried to write a sentence on my own earlier but failed:p

[plush pelican]

Er sagt, er habe ein Auto, das sie beschädigt hätten.

He says he has a car that they damaged.

[gloomy tartan]

But "hätten" in that sentence has the same meaning as k1?

[plush pelican]

Yes

This is the Konjunktiv 2 replacement of Konjunktiv 1

[gloomy tartan]

Interesting. That's new for me. Thanks man!

[brazen granite]

Ich denke, es kommt daher, dass der Konjunktiv 2 alternativ oft mit "würde" als Hilfsverb gebildet wird und man sich dadurch angewöhnt hat, immer einen Infinitiv am Ende zu erwarten.

Er ist wahnsinnig
Er sei wahnsinnig
Er wäre wahnsinnig / Er würde wahnsinnig sein

Er wird wahnsinnig
Er werde wahnsinnig
Er würde wahnsinnig / Er würde wahnsinnig werden

Ich habe die K2 Form ohne das "werden" am Ende definitiv schon mehrfach gehört, aber die Form mit "werden" scheint mir heutzutage bei weitem geläufiger zu sein.

[floral marlin]

Würdet ihr sagen, dass „vergeben“ gehobener als „verzeihen“ ist?

[eager linden]

"Vergeben" und "verzeihen" können auch synonym verwendet werden, haben aber streng genommen einen wesentlichen Unterschied in ihrer Bedeutung.
vergeben heißt, dass jmd. eine Sache getan hat und seine Entschuldigung aber angenommen wird, ohne dass der Person das (in der Zukunft) vorgehalten wird (Du lässt Gnade walten bzw. gibst (gewährst) einer Person Gnade. Der Begriff hat, meiner Meinung nach, auch einen leicht religiösen Charakter.)
verzeihen hingegen bedeutet, dass ein Verständnis für die Tat (einer Person) besteht (Eigentlich leitet sich verzeihen aus dem Wort zeihen ab, was selbst Muttersprachler wahrscheinlich kaum kennen werden. Es heißt so viel wie "beschuldigen" oder "bezichtigen". Wenn man jemanden zeiht, dann klagt man diese Person also an - man bezichtigt sie eines Vergehens. Verzeihen würde bedeuten, dass man die Anklage bzw. Beschuldigung fallen lässt.)

Es kann durchaus vorkommen, dass man jemandem "vergibt", aber nicht "verzeiht". Eine Entschuldigung (für eine schlechte Tat) anzunehmen und zu akzeptieren, heißt nicht zwingend, dass man die Person versteht und die "Anklage" selbst "fallen lässt". Nicht umsonst gibt es für viele Leute Dinge, die unverzeihlich (bzw. unentschuldbar) sind.

[floral marlin]

Danke, das ist sehr ausführlich und klar. Ich werde darüber nachdenken müssen haha

[eager linden]

Gern geschehen👍

[warped oriole]

Interessant. Wusste ich auch nicht, dass da ein Unterschied besteht. Heutzutage werden die Wörter ja meistens als Synonym verwendet.

[eager linden]

Würde ja auch wahrscheinlich sehr vom Kontext und der Situation abhängen, ob man diese Begriffe so stark differenziert xD

[floral marlin]

Ich frage mich, ob es nicht mehr Sinn ergeben würde, zu verzeihen (ohne zu vergeben), als zu vergeben (ohne zu verzeihen)

[eager linden]

Ich würde sagen, dass beides möglich ist. Aus meiner persönlichen Erfahrung heraus würde ich aber sagen, dass ich manche Taten bestimmter Personen (auch von Fremden) eher vergeben als verzeihen würde. Wiedergutmachung wiegt für mich persönlich irgendwie mehr als eine Erklärung der "schlimmen Tat". Pauschal gesagt: Mord würde ich eigentlich niemandem verzeihen.

[floral marlin]

Wenn man jemandem verzeiht, indem man die persönliche Anklage fallen lässt, könnte man das noch im Herzen behandeln. Aber jetzt sehe ich die andere Seite! Mord ist ein gutes Beispiel des Gegenteils

[eager linden]

Aus juristischer Sicht könnte man dies vielleicht so sehen: Die Anklage ggü. einer Person wird nicht so schnell fallen gelassen. ("verzeihen") Das Strafmaß kann aber sehr unterschiedlich, unter Umständen auch sehr mindernd ausfallen. ("vergeben")

[vernal ermine]

Die Kinder spielen der Sport weil sie er mögen. Is this sentence correct?

[eager linden]

Wenn sich das "er" auf "Sport" bezieht, wäre hier ihn korrekt, da das Verb mögen den Akkusativ verlangt. Du kannst aber auch (ohne die relative Bezugnahme auf Sport) schreiben: Die Kinder spielen Sport, weil sie es mögen.

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank❤

[fiery vale]

Where did you see that accusative sentence

[south zenith]

Auf den Weg would mean onto the path, as in from not on the pathway.
Ich war auf dem Weg
Ein Baum ist auf den Weg gefallen

[fiery vale]

Yeah what they said ^

And they don't refer to an indirect object

That's one of the few uses of dative only

An indirect object is for example, Ich gebe dem Mann ein Geschenk

English doesn't really realise it this way and you'd just say I give the man a gift, unless the word order was I give a gift to the man

In the case of prepositions it's just that they all take a certain case, there's no reason really. In the case of Wechselpräpositionen like auf the accusative follows if the sentence shows direction and the dative only shows location

Dative only shows location, but this sentence shows motion

It's moving onto the street

While you'd use Ich bin auf dem Weg if you are in the street

[plush pelican]

Here is a video on two-way prepositions: https://youtu.be/auWRmuw_AcY?si=5AImWVwl1wBnLUrf

[gloomy tartan]

"Und diese Wunden und Spaltungen können nur heilen, wenn eine gemeinsame Geschichte dieser Vergangenheit gefunden wurde, die von allen anerkannt wird."

Shouldn't wurde in this sentence be würde?

[plush pelican]

Seems wrong to me, but wait for a native to chime in

[delicate tiger]

..., nachdem ... gefunden wurde, ...
..., wenn ... geunden würde, ...

[gloomy tartan]

Ah okay. So the sentence is incorrect?

[delicate tiger]

Ich stelle die Tasse auf den Tisch - change of state
Die Tasse steht auf dem Tisch - no change of state

[plush pelican]

Do you know what "Tasse" and "Tisch" mean?

die Tasse = cup
der Tisch = table

I put the cup on the table.

[delicate tiger]

("change of state" because it's not always literal movement)

[plush pelican]

yeah

and "Tisch" is the object of the preposition, so its case is determined by the preposition "auf"

"auf", in turn, is a two-way preposition, so it can be either accusative or dative, depending on what's happening in the rest of the sentence.

because of "stellen", which implies a change of location, "auf" needs its object of the preposition to be in accusative case

The confusing thing is the verb can actually be the same, and you can sometimes use accusative or dative, and the only way to tell is to know which meaning you meant

Ich jogge im Park.
Ich jogge in den Park.

Ich jogge im Park = I jog around inside the park.

Ich jogge in den Park = I start from outside the park, and I jog into the park.

Btw, @delicate tiger

In my workbook, we had to convert sentences into Konjunktiv 2

Die Nutzer werden nervös.

Die Nutzer würden nervös.

Does that make sense to you, and how do you translate "Die Nutzer würden nervös" into English, without mixing it up with "Die Nutzer würden nervös werden"?

[delicate tiger]

that's already a miniscule difference in German

[plush pelican]

Would you have "werden" on the end or not? Remember, it's supposed to be present tense

[plush pelican]

@delicate tiger

[silver raven]

How do I access find study partner? I cannot post in there

[warped oriole]

I don't see why you couldn't use "wurde"

[plain umbra]

You post in #1203330615995269130

[tribal raft]

Really small question:

Can I just say "Ich suche -----" without having to say "Fuer"

Does suchen just imply the for part

[plush pelican]

We can only heal if something happens in the future, something hypothetical. "Wurde" means the thing has already happened in the past. But if that's true, we must already be healed, in which case what are we talking about? The sentence contradicts itself.

Compare:

Wir können nur essen, wenn wir das Gericht kochten. ❌

[long whale]

... you sure? 🤔 "We can only do that (in the future) once a solution has been found, i.e. will have been found", no?

[plush pelican]

"Und diese Wunden und Spaltungen können nur heilen, wenn eine gemeinsame Geschichte dieser Vergangenheit gefunden wurde, die von allen anerkannt wird."

And these wounds and divisions can only heal, when a shared story/history of the past was found, that is recognized by all.

[long whale]

It makes sense to me in German... Sprecher: "Die Nutzer werden nervös." ("Users are becoming nervous"), resp. reported speech/indirekte Rede: "Der Sprecher sagte, die Nutzer würden nervös." (The spokesperson said users were becoming nervous) - Maybe I'm forgetting sth, but I can really only imagine the sentence with würden in the context of reported speech, where it makes sense, bec. you'd have to change "werden" to K2.

[plush pelican]

we're not making indirect speech

It's supposed to be Konjunktiv 2 present tense

It's part of a larger story, let me take a picture

[long whale]

Translated your way, it doesn't make any sense. Does that mean my English sentence doesn't make sense to you?

[plush pelican]

Translated my way is how I understand how you translate it 😅

Eine Lösung wurde gefunden.
A solution was found

[warped oriole]

Wenn du nicht weißt, ob du das Gericht gekocht hast, weil du auf einmal deine Erinnerung verloren hast, dann kannst du die Bedingung aufstellen, dass du nur essen kannst, wenn du schon gekocht hast.

[plush pelican]

In my example sentence, doesn't the first have to also be in Präteritum?

Wir können nur essen, wenn wir das Gericht kochten. ❌
Wir konnten nur essen, wenn wir das Gericht kochten.

[long whale]

The thing is, we could use Futur 2, but why would we? It's highly unusual, and it isn't necessary in German. 🤷

[plush pelican]

Or the second clause has to be changed?

Wir können nur essen, wenn wir das Gericht kochen.

Wir können nur essen, nachdem wir das Gericht gekocht haben.

[plush pelican]

I need you to explain your point in more detail, I'm not quite following

[long whale]

Erst wenn eine Lösung gefunden wurde, können wir investieren = We can only invest once a solution is found/will have been found/gets found 😄

[warped oriole]

@plush pelican do I make sense?

[plush pelican]

You're saying "erst wenn eine Lösung gefunden wurde" = Futur 2?

Where is the Futur 2 coming in?

[long whale]

will have been found - ? Isn't that the equivalent of Futur 2?

[plush pelican]

Wir werden eine Lösung gefunden haben = Futur 2

Or do you mean Futur 2 im Passiv? 😵‍💫

I do not remember how to make that

😅

[long whale]

Eine Lösung wird gefunden worden sein

[plush pelican]

Okay, so what were you trying to say about Futur 2?

[long whale]

That we don't need it. "wenn eine Lösung gefunden wurde" is the normal German version of Futur 2.

[plush pelican]

...what?

[long whale]

If the meaning is clearly future, why use the future form? That's the underlying principle of German. You know that. 🥹

[plush pelican]

I understand that you can use present tense as a replacement for future

I don't get how that translates into "You can use Präteritum for Futur 2"

[warped oriole]

Du kannst die Tür nur öffnen, wenn sie aufgeschlossen wurde.

You don't know yet if someone unlocked the door in the past. But you can only open it if someone did.

Same with your sentence. The wounds can only heal if someone already found what needs to be found.

[long whale]

"Erst wenn eine Lösung gefunden wurde, können wir investieren" seems perfectly fine to me. You could say "Erst wenn eine Lösung gefunden worden sein wird, können wir investieren", instead. Except that sentence is not once I can hear myself saying or writing. 🤷

[plush pelican]

I mean, I would use "nachdem"

Clearly, this is an area that I have not mastered, 😮

Ich zerbreche mir den Kopf darüber

Futur 2 im Passiv with a replacement Präteritum im Passiv, what a world

@long whale Btw, to come back to the other thing

[plush pelican]

.

Zunächst werden die Nutzer nur nervös.

Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös.

How do you translate the 2nd sentence, and how do you translate it in a way different from "Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös werden."?

This isn't reported speech, it's just regular Konjunktiv 2

[long whale]

Just to show you I'm not making things up: Das Futur II wird eher selten zur Bezeichnung einer Aktion benutzt, die in der Zukunft abgeschlossen sein wird. Meist wird hierzu das Futur II durch das Perfekt ersetzt.

Beispiel: Ersatz des Futur II durch Perfekt
Futur II: In zwei Jahren werde ich mein Studium abgeschlossen haben.
Perfekt (oft:) In zwei Jahren habe ich mein Studium abgeschlossen.

[plush pelican]

das Perfekt, but "wurde" isn't Perfekt... is it?

FYI: Hammer's German Grammar does not get into these wild complications of Futur II im Passiv...

[long whale]

I'm not sure the distinction would appear in an English translation, would it? Zunächst werden die Nutzer nur nervös. At first, users are just getting nervous

Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös. At first, users would only get nervous -> That's where it stops in English, doesn't it? You cannot put this into a future tense, can you? If you could, it would take you to:

"Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös werden.", wouldn't it? 🤔

[plush pelican]

I would translate "Zunächst würden die Nutzer nur nervös werden" as "At first, the users would just get nervous."

But if that's also the translation for just "würden" without the werden...

Does my language even have the capability of distinguishing between these?

Is this like "could" = konnte oder könnte, je nachdem?

[kind knoll]

@plush pelican you ever heard of scientists going crazy from one equation they cant solve? This is your equation

[plush pelican]

https://tenor.com/view/muahaha-evil-laugh-evil-laugh-futurama-gif-4133163

[vernal ermine]

Bro why you have changed it to "es"

I was suggested to use " er" because of der Sport.

But I think "ihn" will come here.

I am confused here 🙄

@long whale what you think?

[pure crescent]

you should say it without für. where did you get the idea that suchen needs für? 😅 the only time you would pair those words is when you're looking for something for the sake of someone else. "Ich suche Kleidung für meine Mutter." = I'm looking for clothes for my mother (so that my mother can wear it, or maybe she asked me to look for it, etc)

[plush pelican]

I mean, they obviously got it from English: "I'm searching for X"

[pure crescent]

this is the second time you answered for someone when I ask them a question. can you please stop doing that? I think it's quite rude, and not really good for their learning process. People can answer for themselves — and should. The process of thinking about an answer is very valuable, in every context.

[charred harbor]

Well suchen is a cognate of seek, and in English as well we’d say “I seek X”

[plush pelican]

How often do you really use "seek"?

I mean, I get that thinking of "suchen" as "seek" is probably helpful for understanding saying "Ich suche X" without a preposition. But I mean, in English, how often do you use "seek"? I have a hard time thinking of a time when I've actually used the word, outside of "hide-and-seek" or "if ye seek, ye shall find"

[plush pelican]

Your question came off more like you were making fun of them than asking a real question

[long whale]

No, it isn't. "Sport" doesn't really get combined with "spielen", it's usually "Sport treiben", and yes, it should be "ihn".

[plush pelican]

Interesting 🤔

What about "Basketball spielen"?

Die Kinder spielen Basketball, weil sie (es/ihn) mögen.

There, it should be "es", no?

Alt: "weil es ihnen Spaß macht"

[long whale]

I thought English usually went for "to do sports" instead of "to play sports"? Is that incorrect? - I'd go for "Kinder treiben Sport, weil es ihnen Spaß macht". You can argue about masc/neuter, but it def. can never be "er".

[plush pelican]

Depends on the type of English, I think

[charred harbor]

We rarely use it, wasn’t quite my point tho

[plush pelican]

I think British English might be more "do sport" and American English might be more "play sports"

https://www.italki.com/de/post/question-181024

The reason I asked is because this is an edgecase situation: considering "noun + verb" as a single thing, and thus as "es", or considering "Sport" or "Basketball" on their own, and thus doing "er".

Das Sport machen macht Spaß.
Es macht Spaß

But god help me if I have to explain this all to Jack when I only somewhat grasp it myself, 😅

[long whale]

Yup. I really, really did not want to get into this, though. "mögen" not being used with Nom. seemed a lot more important to me.

[plush pelican]

I found a research paper a while back which indicated that Germans themselves seemed split on especially "Fußball spielen", I think

[long whale]

I thought this was about nicht vs. kein - yes, hah!

[plush pelican]

"kein" would indicate they're thinking of "Fußball" on its own, and thus "er"
"nicht" would indicate they consider it fused together as a single verb thingy, and thus "es"

like das Zeitunglesen

So you see, this actually ties back into the same concept, 😄

The same, deeply complicated and confusing concept

[charred harbor]

As a Brit I feel like “do sports” is only common in certain contexts
“Do you do any sports?” is a bit weird to me as a question (compared to “Do you play any sports?”)
But something like “I do sports pretty regularly” doesn’t look weird to me at all

[plush pelican]

What about sport vs. sports?

[charred harbor]

Sport generally looks a little weird

It might be a math vs maths situation, not sure

[plush pelican]

I thought British English was the one that had it in singular, 😮

[charred harbor]

I mean I would use sport but only in certain contexts

My intuition on it is kind of weird

[long whale]

Yes. It's probably best to claim you're into tennis. Or boxing. 😄

[vernal ermine]

Yeah, Sport is with machen. Spielen is with name of sport. But my main question on the usage of the pronomen between sie and mögen. My teacher was using er, there. I told my teacher that ihn will be correct but my teacher told me again that er only correct.

[plush pelican]

"weil sie er mögen" is never correct

regardless of what the first clause is

"mögen" as a verb requires an accusative object

1. Only "sie" can be the subject in this clause, because only "sie" matches conjugation of "mögen".
2. This means "er" must be the object.
3. But "er" is not in accusative, therefore this cannot be right.

[vernal ermine]

Yeah bro, I explained that to my teacher also but my teacher didn't understand me.

[plush pelican]

Maybe your teacher is bad at German 😬

You could try asking your teacher to write the clause out as a Hauptsatz:

"Sie mögen er."

And ask if they think that makes sense

(it does not)

[charred harbor]

“Why are you not understanding this basic grammar as a professional?”
“For the umpteenth time, I teach Spanish!”

[plush pelican]

Is this a reference to a TV show or something?

[charred harbor]

No, I’m just joking

[long whale]

... except Spanish has a very similar subject/object concept as English: they like he 🤷

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank 🤝

[vernal ermine]

Vielen Dank ❤

[warped oriole]

Better learn with us 😂

[kind knoll]

Whered you find your teacher

I hope you dont pay her

[vague rain]

hallo, is "Jahr" in dativ because of "seit" in this sentence? der ältere Bruder lebt seit zwanzig Jahren in Kanada.

[long whale]

Dativ plural, yes.

[vague rain]

vielen Dank

[vernal ermine]

Locally, I think my teacher was at a bad mood at that time.

German is not a popular language bro @kind knoll , so there are very less options to choose.

[kind knoll]

Well I hope you don't pay her for that service

[vernal ermine]

Unfortunately I paid already.

[kind knoll]

Why is wäre here?

[manic wharf]

In this sentence how do you translate nämlich:

sie hat nämlich Angst vor Wasser

[acoustic breach]

Im not sure how to answer your question. Are you trying to ask what "wäre" means in this sentence?

[kind knoll]

yes, the sentence can do without it no?

[acoustic breach]

No

[south zenith]

it needs at least a form of sein

die Abfallentsorgung ist nicht zu vergessen

[acoustic breach]

There would be no verb, if the "wäre" is not there
I dont know how to call it but "Nicht zu vergessen" is an item on its own

[fervent kernel]

how do you guys use botchanel to learn German?

[long whale]

You click on #botchannel In that channel, you type in >faq (don't forget the >) and the faq's name, e.g. contractions. This calls up an explanation of the topic. Does that help?

[fervent kernel]

Yes it helps

[manic wharf]

In this sentence how do you translate nämlich:
sie hat nämlich Angst vor Wasser (modificato)

[vague rain]

guten Tag, I came up with this sentence: Am Morgen backte die Frau der Grossmutter einen Kuchen.

cant this mean two different things?

danke 😄

[long whale]

https://de.pons.com/übersetzung/deutsch-englisch/nämlich

[gloomy tartan]

Are these sentences correct, and do they have the same meaning? I'm struggling to see the difference between "hätte" and "würde" at times.

Du hast so viel gekocht, als wenn du eine ganze Fußballmanschaft erwarten würdest
Du hast so viel gekocht, als wenn du eine ganze Fußballmanschaft erwartet hättest

[acoustic breach]

Replace "würden erwarten" with "erwarten" and "hätten erwartet" with "haben erwartet" and you'll probably get your answer

[gloomy tartan]

Ugh, not really. Your replacements don't fit in my sentences either

[acoustic breach]

I didnt mean to literally put them directly into your sentence

[plush pelican]

Infinitivsätze (ones with zu... Or um...zu...) can take the place of a subject or an object of a main clause.

Ich hoffe, dich zu sehen.

I hope (to see you)

Schokolade zu essen ist mein Lieblingshobby.
(Eating chocolate) is my favorite hobby.

(Note that Infinitivsätze are also not always separated from the main clause by a comma, especially if they are short)

"Nicht zu vergessen" = should/must be remembered

die Abfallentsorgung= trash disposal/management

The trash disposal would be (something that) should be remembered.

"Nicht zu vergessen" is one of those quasi passive replacements, which may make translating this a bit harder.

sein + nicht + zu + Infinitiv = Empfehlung/Verbot

[acoustic breach]

To my understanding, "erwartet hätte" would be imagining a scenario where you would "had expected (would have happened in the past ≈ erwartet haben)"

"Erwarten würden" would be imagining that you would be currently expecting something (would be hapenning now ≈ erwarten)"

Wenn ich den Brief genommen hätte, würde ich ihn lesen
Genommen hätten: if i had taken (imagine a situation in the past -> genommen haben)

Wenn ich in deinem Haus wäre, würde ich deinen Brief nehmen (imagining a situation in the present/future, where I would take the letter)

[manic wharf]

danke

[acoustic breach]

I would say the first looks better

You cooked so much, as if you are expecting (right now) a football team

Second would mean: you cooked so much, as if you had expected were expecting a football team. This may fit in another context. Maybe when someone is talking about "you remember that one time you cooked so much? Were you expecting a football team?"

@gloomy tartan sorry, edited a little to the messages

[long whale]

You will hear sentences like this, but I'd recommend using "ob" instead of "wenn", at least in writing. They don't have the same meaning, grammar-wise (yes, the 1st is hypothetical present, i.e. as if you were expecting, the 2nd is hypothetical past, i.e. as if you had expected) but both/either would transmit the same idea. 🌻

[gloomy tartan]

Right. Thanks!

Yeah, I thought "wenn sounded strange as well but I saw one of those two sentences I wrote in a grammar book and found it quite strange. I really appreciate your answers guys!

I afterwards also encountered something else that I hadn't seen before. Maybe you can try and explain the logic behind it:p

Er ist zu schüchtern, als dass er nachgefragt hätte
This whole "als dass er" is new to me. Would the meaning change at all if I instead wrote "Er ist zu schüchtern, um nachzufragen"?

[long whale]

No, the meaning wouldn't change at all, and your version seems infinitely better to me. The only remotely logical reason for using such a construction is the existence of 2 different subjects, i.e. sth like: Der Star war von zu vielen Menschen umringt, als dass ich ihn um ein Autogramm hätte bitten können. But even then, IMO, slightly rephrasing and using a simple dass-clause instead would be better: Der Star war von so vielen Menschen umringt, dass ich ihn nicht um ein Autogramm bitten konnte. Does that help?

[gloomy tartan]

Dang. Yeah it does. Thanks a ton!

[plush pelican]

@gloomy tartan

Hammer's also recommends using "um...zu..." when the subject of the two clauses is the same.

"als dass" is for when the subjects differ.

From Hammer's German Grammar 17.5.3 and 11.2.6(a):

[gloomy tartan]

Wow okay. Man, have I been living under a rock? I've been learning German for several years now and can speak, read and write at a decent level, but I don't think I've ever seen an expression like "er ist zu vernünftig, als dass ich das von ihm erwartet hätte". Is it a bit archaic or have I simply failed to notice it?:p

[long whale]

Can't say for sure, but it doesn't really feel archaic to me. Wouldn't worry - just file under "things which exist", I'd say. 🌻

[plush pelican]

As it says in the pic, "als dass" is avoided in daily speech in favor of easier constructions

[red palm]

In the sentence: "den bei dem Monolith gefangene Forschern helfen" the first "den" is dative because helfen always takes dative, right? It would be "die bei dem Monolith gefangene Forschern retten". Or am I wrong here?

The "den" is basically like "__**those **__researchers that are trapped", right?
But how would the sentence sound in a normal order? like "Helfen Sie den gefangenen Forschern bei dem Monolith"?

[gloomy tartan]

Yeah, I'm not a native speaker, but that's exactly how I'd describe it. Your last sentence is also correct

[red palm]

Ty. I saw this structure a few times but it now caught my eyes because the "den" was used and I wanted to understand if it is the single masc accusative "den" or plural dative "den" 😄 .

[long whale]

"den bei dem Monolith gefangenen Forschern helfen", resp. "die bei dem Monolith gefangenen Forscher (no -n!) retten"

[jagged oak]

Hello there, I have a question. So, I have seen the following phrases:

• Ich bin sicher
• Ich bin mir nicht sicher

Why the negative has the reflexive pronoun while the affirmative doesn't???
Can I add the reflexive pronoun to the affirmative?
Does this happen with other phrases related with the verb sein?

[whole portal]

Ich bin mir sicher and Ich bin nicht sicher are both fine

[jagged oak]

like, coloquailly talking is fine? or from a grammatical point of view is also correct not to use the reflexive pronoun there?

[long whale]

The reflexive is optional in this particular phrase. 🌻

[jagged oak]

thanks so much, very kind from you both 🙂

[outer edge]

Hi what would be correct?
Vergiss nicht unseren Videoanrufe
Or
Vergiss unseren Videoanrufe nicht
Can someone help me please

[long whale]

Neither is correct. The ending of unser- is not in accordance with the noun it refers to, since Videoanrufe is plural. As to word order, you'll definitely hear the 1st version, but at least in writing, the 2nd version would be preferable. 🌻

[outer edge]

Agh I meant Videoanruf

Thanks
However, I'd like to ask, why is it that the 2nd version is preferable in writing but not in speaking?

[plush pelican]

Because of the usage of the Nachfeld, I think

But in order to understand what I mean by that, you first have to understand the Feldermodell of German sentences...

You can break a sentence down into 4 main parts:

1. the Vorfeld, aka "position 1". Here, you have either the subject of the sentence, or the "topic" of the sentence.
2. the linke Satzklammer, aka "position 2". Here, you have the conjugated verb
3. the Mittelfeld. This is where most stuff in a sentence goes.
4. the rechte Satzklammer. If you have more than one verb, or a separable verb, you can't fit everything involving verbs into the linke Satzklammer alone, so you put the other stuff here. In other words: there are 2 spots for verbs and verb stuff in a sentence: the linke Satzklammer and the rechte Satzklammer.

When you go to negate the sentence generally, you put the "nicht" just before the rechte Satzklammer.

Ich habe heute gespielt.
ich = Vorfeld
habe = linke Satzklammer
heute = Mittelfeld
gespielt = rechte Satzklammer

Ich habe heute nicht gespielt.

In an imperative sentence, like yours, "Vergiss" is in the linke Satzklammer
"unseren Videoanruf" is in the Mittelfeld
and then you would put "nicht" just to the left of the rechte Satzklammer, thus:

Vergiss unseren Videoanruf nicht

"But wait", you say, "What about the Nachfeld?"

Well, the Nachfeld is the 5th part of a sentence. It is mostly used when speaking, especially when speaking colloquially.

The Nachfeld is the spot for "oops, I forgot to put this into my sentence earlier, so I'll just tack it on to the end"

Like, say I'm talking to you and I want to say

Ich habe heute mit meinem Bruder im Park gespielt.

It would look like this:

But let's say that I forget to say "im Park"

and instead, I say, "Ich habe heute mit meinem Bruder gespielt"

instead of starting my sentence over, I can just drop in "im Park" in that Nachfeld, the "oopsie" spot

So, you use the Nachfeld for when you forgot or are being lazy and didn't put something in its proper spot the first time

Let's go back to the imperative sentence of yours

We get out "Vergiss nicht", but then put "unseren Videoanruf" in the Nachfeld

rather than in the Mittelfeld to the left of "nicht", where it's supposed to go

Now, this is allowed, but it's a more colloquial way of saying it, and thus you should avoid it in writing, especially on tests.

[kind knoll]

I see where you're coming from, but im not totally sure about why we chose wäre out of all forms of sein

[plush pelican]

I mean, I didn't choose it

But I think I can guess why

Konjunktiv 2 is used to make things more polite, yeah?

Ich will einen Tee!

Ich möchte einen Tee

X ist nicht zu vergessen = you shouldn't forget or you must not forget X

so by putting it as "wäre" instead, I think that softens it, from being a Verbot to more of a Ratschlag

[kind knoll]

Others have said that you need a form of sein here but when I put the sentence into deepl it suggests nicht zu vergessen die Abfallentsorgung

[plush pelican]

It just says "nicht zu vergessen die Abfallentsorgung", nothing else?

🤔

[kind knoll]

yes

[plush pelican]

Sounds weird to me

or like you need a comma because it's using an unusual grammar

(es ist) nicht zu vergessen, die Abfallentsorgung

What do you put in to get that as a result?

[kind knoll]

i put in the sentence with wäre, reversed the translation and it came up with this

[plush pelican]

?

I think I get something different

[plush pelican]

"not forgetting waste disposal" isn't a sentence in English

[kind knoll]

its a dependant clause, ...... not forgetting waste disposal

[plush pelican]

I think the German sentence uses so much stuff that is particular to German, that DeepL has a hard time translating it properly.

The German sentence is a dependent clause and an independent clause, not just a dependent clause.

The German sentence is complete on its own.

[kind knoll]

I see. give me a minute let me go back to where the sentence stammt von

[plush pelican]

So yeah, if you put in an English dependent clause, it makes sense that it might spit out something in German that is also not a full proper setnence

[kind knoll]

Okay yeah I got it

the waste disposal should not be forgotten, thats what wäre is here for

In my mind i saw not to forget the waste disposal

[plush pelican]

Btw: Don't forget to capitalize first words and add punctuation marks at the end

DeepL is hypersensitive to that, and forms better sentences when the input has everything formatted properly.

So like, if I put in what you did, but just capitalize and use punctuation:

Still not the top suggestion, but better than the 3 suggestions it gave you that were all incomplete

[kind knoll]

I don't know why that never crossed my mind, I forgot computers have a hard time reading sentences without perfect grammar

Thanks bud

[vernal ermine]

Ich kann leider nicht erst um sechs.

What does" erst" means here?

[plush pelican]

"erst" is usually paired with something after it, a condition.

Only after that condition is true (can you do something)

erst um 6 Uhr wäre ich frei = only at 6 o'clock would I be free. (Before 6 o'clock I am busy, only at 6 o'clock am I no longer busy)

So I think your sentence there is actually two clauses, with not enough punctuation and some omitted parts

Ich kann leider nicht; erst um sechs (Uhr wäre ich frei).

[vernal ermine]

Does it have meaning also like "from six"

[plush pelican]

Maybe, or that might be "erst ab 6 Uhr"; I'm not sure 🤔

[vernal ermine]

@plush pelican

[plush pelican]

?

[vernal ermine]

Yeah, I understand now

Sie schlafen am Sonntagvormittag aus.