Is this right?

[split tusk]

I think I'd say "Haben Sie es mithilfe von Büchern gelernt?"

Bitte, gern. - I'm not sure what you mean?

Even after all these years on the server, I'm still not sure what friend requests are for. 😄

[plucky tulip]

We are all friends 🌻

I mean, this server is so wonderfully made, your questions can be answered directly in #questions . If you want to ask something private (regarding health etc) you can always ask in this channel and someone can perhaps DM you.

[plucky tulip]

I guess it is for learners to time up/schedule an appointment and come to audio channels to practice their speaking. Trust me, it has not once worked out for me 🙂

[split tusk]

Try deepl.com - it's pretty accurate, at least for German (having been made by Germans ;) )

[plucky tulip]

Me neither. Try using deepl. You can first translate in your head and then compare it with the translation generated by DeepL. It also allows you to click on individual words for alternatives...... exactly what Susana said

[timid reef]

Ich weiß nicht, dass Deepl von Deutschen machen wurde

[split tusk]

Nice try, but you'd want to put "weiß" into Präteritum, and check the past participle of "machen". 😽

[jolly prism]

Stammt aus München, nicht wahr?

[timid reef]

Ich wusste nicht, dass Deepl con Deutschen gemacht wurde?

[split tusk]

*von - yes. 💐

[timid reef]

ah ja

Typo

[timid reef]

Also jedes mal, wenn ich sagen will "I didn't know", Ich werde "Ich wusste nicht" sagen?

Danke Susana

[cedar dew]

Was ist richtig
Ich werde auf dich wor dem Bahnhof warten. Oder
Ich werde vor dem bahnhof auf dich warten?

[split tusk]

2nd

[cedar dew]

Warum??

[inland scarab]

Dative (place) goes first, then accusative (direct object) in a sentence like this.

[unborn moss]

In what sentence?

If you mean the sentence "Ich werde vor dem Bahnhof auf dich warten", it doesn't have any direct objects.

[inland scarab]

technically it does? auf dich? that's in accusative case

I'm waiting at the train station for you. The order still stands...I think

though I do understand it's not really a direct object

use of accusative grammar still follows those rules

[unborn moss]

Accusative case, yes. Direct object, no.

[unborn moss]

What rules?

[inland scarab]

okay, now I'm getting less and less sure of myself, but I swear the rule was so:

if you have accusative content and dative content, the dative comes before the accusative

the only exception being when it's personal pronouns, in which case the accusative goes first and dative comes second

which is the reason why:

Ich werde vor dem Bahnhof auf dich warten

is the most correct ordering of the sentence

[timber tendon]

You are probably thinking of the rules for direct objects, which doesn't apply when it's a verb+preposition combination. Remember, a "direct object" means that it's not an object of a preposition. If the noun is an object of a preposition, it's not a direct object.

Take a look at this word order chart:

you can see on the chart:

direct pronouns are indeed accusative followed by dative
nouns with definite articles are indeed dative followed by accusative
nouns with indefinite articles are also dative followed by accusative

But when it's a verb+preposition combination and there's an object, then the preposition + the object are "Verbgefährte", verb traveling companions, which have their own category near the bottom

[unborn moss]

To add to what Argus wrote, the rule you're thinking of applies when you have verbs with 2 objects, like geben. Ich gebe dem Mann das Buch. As you can see, no prepositions. That's the key difference here.

And it doesn't apply to adverbs. Like I just noticed now that you're implying it's for any content, even adverbials. Adverbials have completely separate rules compared to verb objects. A location adverb (regardless of whether or not dative is involved) usually prefers to be at the end of the Mittelfeld.

Take a simple sentence with the elements you mentioned for example: Ich sehe den Hund im Park. Direct object is accusative here, location adverbial with dative. But no "dative before accusative" rule exists here.