What’s the detailed difference between the meaning of these two sentences?
Präteritum Konjunktiv I: Die Gruppe sei gestern informiert worden.
Präteritum Konjunktiv II: Die Gruppe wäre bereits vor der Abreise informiert worden.
#Konjunktiv I & II
thorn marsh
strong flower
i think it's a matter of register - correct me if im wrong-
normally you use KI of sein here in writing because it's form is different of that from the indicative, but in speech you may use KII/indicative/conditional form
shell parcel
So, there are some times when you use Konjunktiv II as a replacement for Konjunktiv 1, but I don't think that's what's happening here.
I think here the second sentence actually has a difference in meaning.
1st sentence: The group was (allegedly) informed yesterday.
2nd sentence: The group would have already been informed before the departure.
In the first sentence, you are reporting what someone else said was true: Bob told you that the group was informed yesterday. You use Konjunktiv I to be like, "Look, somebody told me this, I don't personally know it to be true, but he said it happened."
In the second sentence, it's a hypothetical, so it may not have happened.
If the group is a class of schoolkids getting ready to board an airplane, you might be like, "Well, I know their teacher to be responsible, and he would've told the class about any unexpected weather conditions, so the group would have already been informed before the departure that there were tornadoes in Kansas."
Here, no one has told you that the group was informed, you're hypothesizing, you're assuming that they would have been informed (because you know that the teacher is a responsible guy, so he likely would've informed them.)
But that's just my read on it 😅 . Ask a native to be sure.
strong flower
oh yeah my bad, you can't know whether this is indirect speech...
so then it must be the regular use of KII: possibility/unreal condition (see above)
thorn marsh
Danke. I think the 1nd sentence has a meaning of“it was said“. Oh, I am planning to attend a course.
latent nexus
So, there are some times when you use Konjunktiv II as a replacement for Konjunk...
Argus, it's simply the difference between very formal/official written and informal/spoken. The 2nd would only have the hypothetical-in-the-past meaning if it went like "... wäre... informiert worden, wenn wir die Handynummern der Teilnehmer gehabt hätten"
(but we didn't, so, we couldn't)
shell parcel
Argus, it's simply the difference between very formal/official written and infor...
Wait, you're saying both are reported speech, "someone else said this, and I'm just reporting it"?
latent nexus
Wait, you're saying both are reported speech, "someone else said this, and I'm j...
Well, I'd say "allegedly" fits best. But yeah.
shell parcel
Oh snap
So wait
How do you translate
"The group would have already been informed before the departure."
?
Because exactly that translates into the German sentence according to DeepL
strong flower
but how can you know the second one is reporetd speech?
latent nexus
How do you translate
"The group would have already been informed before the dep...
In that example with the responsible teacher, I'd say we'd just use Indikativ and add in sth like bestimmt or sicherlich. 🤷
shell parcel
Die Gruppe ist bestimmt bereits vor der Abreise informiert?
latent nexus
Die Gruppe ist bestimmt bereits vor der Abreise informiert?
*... worden
Yeah.
Die Gruppe wird informiert worden sein is another possibility, I'd say. 🤔
latent nexus
but how can you know the second one is reporetd speech?
Because there is no context to tell you it's hypothetical in the past. Please don't forget there is always context irl. ;)
shell parcel
I'm not sure I understand
strong flower
context
latent nexus
I'm not sure I understand
For some reason, changing it to stative passive feels extremely awkward to me in combination with "vor der Abreise" - if that's what's unclear to you.
strong flower
no
latent nexus
The thing is: K1 is very, very rarely used in real life. We replace it with K2.
strong flower
yeah its what i said in the first massage here
but then.... yeah, i realised i haev no proof of it being indirect speech
(because you dont use KII here to say something would be hypothetical)
shell parcel
The thing is: K1 is very, very rarely used in real life. We replace it with K2.
But how do you distinguish between K2 "hypothetical" and K2 "reported speech"?
Like the situation I described with the school kids
latent nexus
But how do you distinguish between K2 "hypothetical" and K2 "reported speech"?
The thing which tells you it didn't happen is missing. Respectively, situational context. 🥹
shell parcel
But what I'm talking about is not saying it didn't happen
I'm talking about speculating that something may have happened and you don't know
strong flower
i guess in english you can just say "The group would have been informed" (just like you can in my language)
But in german it doesn't make sense without further context, is this it?
latent nexus
But what I'm talking about is not saying it didn't happen
No, in your example with the teacher it's like "Presumably, it happened", right?
And that's what I gave you possible translations for.
shell parcel
Like, "Die Gruppe wäre wohl schon vor der Abreise informiert worden."
latent nexus
i guess in english you can just say "The group would have been informed" (just l...
I'd say that's it, yes.
strong flower
well then yeah, it's not worth grasping through logic, you gotta form the feel for this peculiarity
shell parcel
And that's what I gave you possible translations for.
When you talked about Indikativ? But that's just one way of expressing that, the colloquial way. Wouldn't the formal/non-colloquial way still have K2?
shell parcel
well then yeah, it's not worth grasping through logic, you gotta form the feel f...
That's what I thought I had done. But apparently I was wrong 😅
strong flower
so instead of KII you use indikativ and add some adverbials to bring the sense of probability
just like it happens with the future tense when the context already gives away the action is about the future
latent nexus
Like, "Die Gruppe wäre wohl schon vor der Abreise informiert worden."
Look, what I'm saying is: if there is no situational context whatsoever, then there is no way of telling whether this is the beginning (!) of a hypothetical-in-the-past thing or reported speech, okay?
shell parcel
When you say "hypothetical in the past", is that something that could have happened but didn't, or something that may or may not have happened?
You keep seeming to talk about the former, but I thought K2 included the latter
latent nexus
When you say "hypothetical in the past", is that something that could have happe...
could have but didn't
shell parcel
As I understand it, you could use K2 in the school kid situation to talk about something in the past that may or may not have happened. Is that wrong?
latent nexus
You keep seeming to talk about the former, but I thought K2 included the latter
That's usually what subjective use of modals is for. Or the "wird [wohl/bestimmt] informiert worden sein" version.
shell parcel
"wird... worden sein" is wild to me
shell parcel
Ah, that page lists it as Futur II, but grays it out, saying that form is barely ever used.
wheat lagoon
Sounds less intimidating if you say it in English. (For native English speakers)
latent nexus
It's basically the only real life usage of Futur 2.
shell parcel
That's usually what subjective use of modals is for. Or the "wird [wohl/bestimmt...
When you say subjective use of modals, how would you use a subjective modal for the school kid situation?
Die Gruppe soll bereits vor der Abreise informiert worden sein?
latent nexus
Es wird so gewesen sein = I'm sure this is what happened.
latent nexus
When you say subjective use of modals, how would you use a subjective modal for ...
That depends on the degree of certainty - which is entirely subjective. Which is why that's one of the things I feel are best learnt through input. At least, the grammar book "rules" always make me go 🤔
shell parcel
Say, 70% certain?
latent nexus
When you say subjective use of modals, how would you use a subjective modal for ...
With "soll" I'd feel we're back to reported speech, only a bit vaguer: I was told this happened.
latent nexus
This is itself an area that I'm shaky on 😅
No wonder!
latent nexus
Say, 70% certain?
Maybe "dürfte informiert worden sein" would amount to 70%? Only god and the grammar book writers would know...
shell parcel
This seems crazy to me, though
If what you're saying is right, that means English and German diverge heavily when it comes to discussing hypothetical situations.
Which isn't to say that's not actually also the truth
strong flower
to be fair with context this would have been about 99% easier to pin down, dont worry
latent nexus
If what you're saying is right, that means English and German diverge heavily wh...
I think this is applies mainly to this - to me! - weird promise-y/presumably meaning of English will/would.
strong flower
hey you know, maybe that also played in OP's confussion!
wheat lagoon
If what you're saying is right, that means English and German diverge heavily wh...
How so?
latent nexus
Like... He'll have gone to the shops = Er wird einkaufen gegangen sein -> everything fine and dandy, I feel those correspond 100%. But then, you go and put this into the past by going He would have gone to the shops - and that I find totally confusing, because, well, did something happen to stop him from going there, or is that you thinking it presumably happened? @shell parcel
strong flower
ahh...
oh i see, without context it sounds like its indirect speech
shell parcel
How so?
She's saying you have to use subjective modals to talk about hypotheticals in the past that may be true. You don't have to do this in English.
"They (likely) would've been informed before the departure" means that. Even without the likely.
And "would've been informed" doesn't mean "he would've been informed, if not for the terrible accident", aka the hypothetical can only be something that turns out not to he true.
shell parcel
Like... He'll have gone to the shops = Er wird einkaufen gegangen sein -> everyt...
"he would've gone to the shops" can mean "he would've gone, if not for the terrible fire". (Aka it didn't actually happen)
But I think it needs the additional context to tip it into the negative.
If a detective says "Where was Mark at 8 am yesterday morning?"
And someone replies, "He would've gone to work"
That sounds like it did happen, or at least you're guessing it did (probably based on him always going to work at 8)
latent nexus
"he would've gone to the shops" *can* mean "he would've gone, if not for the ter...
Yeah. And that's where you feel you should use "wäre" for "would", and that simply doesn't work for this meaning.
shell parcel
Yeah. And that's where you feel you should use "wäre" for "would", and that simp...
Because for y'all, if it's K2 in the past, that implies something that could have happened but didn't?
Whereas K2 in the present may or may not happen? It's still possible that it could happen?
latent nexus
"he would've gone to the shops" *can* mean "he would've gone, if not for the ter...
Yeah. Whereas German goes: Hello? Futur 2 is already about the past! Whether something presumably happened a minute ago or yesterday morning at 8 is immaterial -> Mark wird auf dem Weg zur Arbeit gewesen sein.
latent nexus
Because for y'all, if it's K2 *in the past*, that implies something that could h...
Yup. Das wäre schön gewesen = That would have been nice [too bad it didn't happen/come true] OR, if there's context, in spoken German: [S/he said] it was nice. But never, ever In all likelihood, it was nice
Das wäre schön = That would be nice, i.e. hopefully, it will happen/come true
wheat lagoon
"he would've gone to the shops" *can* mean "he would've gone, if not for the ter...
Although I understand this example intuitively myself, I did a quick Google search about it see what kind of comments are out there broadly about this topic. Apparently a lot of English speakers also misintepret this and they think (similar to the German version) that "would have" would only be something that didn't happen, and suggest that "should have" is the correct way here.
shell parcel
Although I understand this example intuitively myself, I did a quick Google sear...
? what?
latent nexus
Although I understand this example intuitively myself, I did a quick Google sear...
so, so, SO relieved
shell parcel
For the school kid example? Talk me through this
wheat lagoon
For the school kid example? Talk me through this
Well I mean for example "He would've gone to work" would be (according to some people) "He should've gone to work"
Here's an example: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/54591/should-have-done-vs-would-have-done?rq=1
shell parcel
That sounds like either British English, or some shit that English as a second language learners learn, like using "shall" (that doesn't actually reflect how the language is used.)
wheat lagoon
Obviously these are just random threads and not confirmation of any correct/incorrect grammar rules. But I just thought it's a good insight into what people use intuitively.
wheat lagoon
*so, so, SO relieved*
So you said that, if you use "will have done" instead of "would have done" the German equivalent works for that?
latent nexus
So you said that, if you use "will have done" instead of "would have done" the G...
Yup, definitely.
wheat lagoon
Okay, that makes sense then to me.
Like I'm thinking that the "will have done" is the original one but because it sounds too certain, the English form developed a softer form by turning "will" into "would", but at a later time than most of these subjective uses had developed.
That seems like an easy thing for English speakers to do.
Especially since we dropped "sollen" from English, people either have to use should or would as the alternative.
Because I'm thinking "sollen" would be the closest to this meaning, right?
shell parcel
Except she said earlier "sollen" starts sounding like reported speech
wheat lagoon
Well that's what it is.
To me anyway.
I mean it's not necessarily reported like a direct quote, right? It's more like "this is the expected action according to what I know".
There is a distinction though because you have both "would have" as in "this is the schedule / this is the plan they told me" and "would have" as in "I know their personality so well I can guess their actions". And the latter probably wouldn't fit with sollen.
latent nexus
Because I'm thinking "sollen" would be the closest to this meaning, right?
Could you tell me which sentence we're talking about? If it's Mark on his way to work, I feel Mark soll auf dem Weg zur Arbeit gewesen sein ~ Mark is said to have been on his way to work. Whereas Mark sollte auf dem Weg zur Arbeit gewesen sein is kind of ambiguous: might mean Mark was supposed to have been on his way to work OR Mark should have been on his way to work (but possibly wasn't)
shell parcel
Before I forget: Danke Susana