![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It was I who did the edit 06:37, 19 March 2006 84.58.192.147 (→Relative clauses - "wo" in spoken language). I did not realise that i was not logged in anymore. --Thomasnimmesgern 06:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
At the moment, this reads like it belongs in "Wikibooks". Wikipedia is not a "how to guide" - the article could do with being "encyclopedized" i.e. descriptive not instructive. It certainly shouldn't contain "you", addressed to the reader! TheGrappler 18:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
I added the missing "Frau" word in "Relative clauses" section. Mix7 15:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
"Du hast deiner Frau einen roten Ring gekauft" (You bought your wife a red ring) - "Welchen Roten hast du deiner Frau gekauft?" (Which red one did you buy your wife?) It seems to me that this question works in German only as the short form of "Welchen roten Ring hast du deiner Frau gekauft?", meaning "roten" would not be capitalized as "Ring" is simply omitted in speach. "Roten" capitalized suggests to me a name, at the most a wine. However, my Duden did not yield an answer as to which form would be correct. Can someone else please look it up and correct it if I'm right? --KagamiNoMiko 20:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, I try to explain it. Capitalized or not You can use an adjectiv in German as a noun. But it depends on the structure of the whole text if it be written capitalized or not: ... roten Ring ... der rote ... Not capalized, because the word is used in the same paragraph or sentence.
... roter Ring... NEW PARAGRAPH ... der Rote ... Capitalized because of the new paragraph.
Why? I don't know! I learnd it that way in school.
Meaning and use of "Roten" This depends on the focus of the speaker. "Du hast deiner Frau einen roten Ring gekauft. Welchen roten hast du deiner Frau gekauft?" In this question it's important for the one who asked which sort of red ring was bought. Important here is the colour of the ring and that there were different sorts of red rings sold.
"Du hast deiner Frau einen roten Ring gekauft. Welchen hast du gekauft?" Here the colour is unimportant only the sort is of interest.
I would avoid this by replacing noun and adjective with "was": "Was hast du deiner Frau gekauft".Ego fui (talk) 09:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
What kind of word-order-struction does the german has? is it (like english) subject-verb-object or something different? a question that is not answered within this article directly... (corect is: it is subject-object-verb.)--139.18.180.50 15:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
A way to form your sentences: Sv1TOMPv2 S: subject v1: 1st verb O: object M: manner P:place v2: 2nd verb
Since we have a Flexionsystem (der,dessen,dem,den) you can mix up the word order, thats why you need this static word order in english because you cannot see at the article "the" if its a subject or object. Here an example from the english grammar page of wiki: Der Mann wirft den Ball dem Hund zu. (Subjekt-Akkusativobjekt-Dativobjekt) Der Mann wirft dem Hund den Ball zu. (Subjekt-Dativobjekt-Akkusativobjekt) Dem Hund wirft der Mann den Ball zu. (Dativobjekt-Subjekt-Akkusativobjekt) Den Ball wirft der Mann dem Hund zu. (Akkusativobjekt-Subjekt-Dativobjekt) (Deutsch: „dem“ indicates Dativ , „den“ Akkusativ, „der“ Nominativ)) The man throws the dog the ball. (indirektes Objekt zuerst) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.57.72.38 (talk) 13:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I still feel that this page just lists a whole lot of specific situations, but no general rule or feel for the sentence structure. In your examples, I see that the verb is always the second constituent, and that they all end in "zu". Things like this are clearly indicative of some general rules. AndreRD (talk) 14:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Clearly **German is not a OV language;** the quoted Haider "can be characterised as the leader of the minority party" according toa book review. [1]. **German main clauses follow the V2 pattern** which appears as SVO if the subject is first ("Ich kaufe ein Auto"). See the German Wikipedia article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/V2-Stellung#Abgrenzung_vom_Wortstellungsmuster_SVO which appears well written. This statement is plain wrong and confuses people, as can be seen in this Stack Exchange discussion (which brought me here): https://german.stackexchange.com/questions/65369/is-german-a-vo-language-or-an-ov-language.Peter.A.Schneider (talk) 23:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
A normal statement is quite simple to construct. First the Subject, then the conjugated verb, at last the rest of the infinitive without this verb.
"Ein Text" - "geschrieben werden" - "Ein Text wird geschrieben" (A text - to be written - a text is being written [or: a text is going to be written])
This is NOT Subject-Verb-Object. Its passive Voice and so "Ein Text" is the Object, the same as in English "A Text is being written (by ...)" A Text cant do anything. The Author writes the text and not vice versa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.57.84.255 (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
References
There are several cases where the grammer is wrong. I have striked through a couple of mistakes, I Found, under Relative clauses. I am a bit new at this, so someone needs to go through the whole page and look for faulty grammer.(I might do it, though.)
The original English sentence is correct.
In the first section, there is a mistake "Ich" - "den Müll wegwerfen" (I / throw away the rubbish) "Ich werfe den Müll weg" (statement) (I'm throwing away the rubbish) In German, there is only one way to phrase the sentence I am throwing away the rubbish, or I throw away the rubbish. "Ich werfe den Müll weg" is proper. "Ich den Müll wegwerfen" suggests future tense, as in "Ich werde den Müll wegwerfen", or another tense that I cannot think of right now but I am pretty sure is there.ItsJodo (talk) 22:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
As far as the discussion page shows, this page is not claimed responsibility for by any Portal, yet considering the style of all articles on the navigation box I have read so far, this should probably be the case. Should this as well as the other articles regarding the German language be tagged for the Portal:Languages ?--91.6.9.151 (talk) 17:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree with the list that lays out the typical order of German sentences. It does not take in consideration the differences between Accusative and Dative Pronouns compared to Accusative and Dative nouns. For example: Pronouns come before nouns regardless of what case they are in. This list is therefore confusing because using the information given, one would possible put the accusative pronoun after the dative noun. Mochattez 07:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochattez (talk • contribs)
"and then, in Northern German slang, to all relative clauses:
Der Mann, wo bei Siemens arbeitet, hat an der Technischen Universität studiert. "The man where works at Siemens's has graduated from the Technical University."
Southern Germans never use this form, but they have constructed a double form "der wo, die wo, das wo" which is almost necessary in their dialect. "Wo" may here be replaced by "was", which for undiscoverable reasons seems to occur mostly in the feminine genus."
Southern Germans do use the pure "wo" form extensively, namely in Baden-Württemberg and the Swabian dialect areas of Bavaria (check it out!). Plus, the assertion that the alternative "der/die/das was" is used mostly in the feminine form is completely unfounded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.251.8.106 (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
It would be nice if information about some more complicated sentence structures was included. For example, two main sentences joined together with a comma, or sentences with one subject and two main verbs, etc. I know that there is no way to include everything in Duden - Die Grammatik, but adding a few examples of sentences from normal German newspapers would be a great help for anyone trying to translate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.93.37 (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Should this page include the TeKaMoLo rule ("Temporal, Kausal, Modal, Local" = time-cause-manner-place) for the order in which such information ("adpositional phrases") is presented in a German sentence?
The German convention is distinctive, and far more absolute, than the relative freedom that goes in English.
Various websites present this, eg this is an early Google hit
and heavier-weight references could no doubt be found.
It is touched on a bit at Time–manner–place, at the general level that some languages can have strong conventions of this kind. But I think it would be useful to make a thorough presentation here, as it applies to German. Jheald (talk) 19:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)