Learning German language

Originally Posted by Vlad

HI,

I've stumbled upon this expression in German and I can't figure it out...if anyone could help me I would greatly appreciate it

So, die Ausdruck ist: "wo gibts denn sowas"

What does it mean, when is it used, when it should not be used ...?

Danke sehr !

Vlad

This actually is a strong expression of resentment in view of something exceedingly brazen. To grasp the true meaning, expand the literal translation "where does anything like this exist??" to, say, "wherever does (that brazen scoundrel) think a behaviour like his would meet with anything else than vigorous rejection?". Examples:

1) "Erst mein Auto ausleihen und zu Klump fahren, und jetzt meinen Zweitwagen haben wollen? Wo gibt's denn sowas??"
(First he borrows my car and ruins it, and now he wants to borrow my second car? Is he out of his mind??)

2) (current politics, but SCNR) "Unser ganzes Land als Nazis beschimpfen, bloß weil wir unser Geld wiedersehen wollen, und gleichzeitig noch ein paar hundert Milliarden fordern! Wo gibt's denn sowas?" (the translation is left as an exercise to the reader...)

Kind of like "verdammt" much stronger in German than English?

Originally Posted by muge

hallo jedermann, ich könnte (sic) deutsch ehemals, aber leider hab ich vergessen manche dinge. so, meine fragen sind:

1) was war der unterschied mit konj 1. und 2. ich erinnere, dass konjunktive 1 eine form ist, dass wir in kindergeschichten usw benützen. und konj 2 eine form wie zum beispiel in englisch " i would, i could". es tut mir leid dass ich diese formen vergessen habe. könnt ihr bitte diese forme für personal pronomen machen als ich, du, er/sie/es, wir ihr sie Sie?

Ich bin kein Experte für formale deutsche Grammatik, aber "gefühlsmäßig" wäre meine Erklärung etwa so:

im Deutschen gibt es 1) die Konditionalformen (Konstruktionen mit Hilfsverben, wie englisch "could", "would"), und 2) den echten Konjunktiv (Formen der Verben selbst): wie im Französischen und, ja, auch im Englischen (obwohl der echte Konjunktiv im Englischen, glaube ich, recht selten ist).

Die Konditionalformen
* a) sind in erster Linie für den Hauptsatz (nicht den Nebensatz) in Konditional-Nebensatz-Konstruktionen
* b) sind auch für höfliche Umschreibungen (vgl. "I would like to...")
* c) können in der Umgangssprache fast überall den echten Konjunktiv ersetzen. Note: das Konditional tendiert dazu, schwerfällig (clumsy) zu wirken.

Der echte Konjunktiv wird eingesetzt hauptsächlich in allen Arten von "unwirklichen" Nebensätzen (auch "unwirklichen" Hauptsätzen wie Wünschen usw.), zudem hauptsächlich in der gehobenen Schriftsprache. Jemand, der in der gesprochenen Sprache echte Konjunktive durchgehend korrekt verwendet und dabei wirkt, als ob er das aus (guter) Gewohnheit tut (nicht, weil er damit angeben will), erweckt einen kultivierten Eindruck.

Sicher hab ich einiges hier vergessen. Und dann gibt es auch die Ausnahmen...

Beispiele

1.a1) (Potentialis) Wenn er morgen an Ort X sein könnte, würden wir dort ein Meeting abhalten. (In case he could make it to location X to-morrow, we would arrange a meeting there. (Possible, but uncertain)).
1.a2) (Irrealis) Wäre er gestern an Ort X gewesen, würde ich ihn gesehen haben. (If he had been at location X yesterday, I should have seen him. (Purely hypothetical)).
1.a3) Verwirrenderweise: Genauso korrekt (selbe Bedeutung, zudem eleganter): Wäre er gestern an Ort X gewesen, hätte ich ihn gesehen.
1.a4) Ausnahme: Realis: Wenn Du morgen kommst, gehen wir zusammen aus. (when you come by to-morrow, we'll go out together): alles im Indikativ, weil das eine wirkliche Zusage ist.

1.b1) (Höflichkeitsform) Wenn es Dir passt, würde ich morgen gern vorbeikommen. (If it suits you I'd like to see you to-morrow).

1.b2 (Wunsch, Kausalsatz, Höflichkeitsform) Ich würde lieber heute vorbeikommen, weil es morgen zu unsicher ist.
(I'd prefer to come by to-day since it's too uncertain that I could make it to-morrow).

1.c) (Umgangssprache, schwerfällig) Wenn alle Esel Goldstücke spucken würden, würden alle Müller reich. (If all donkeys would be able to spit gold coins, all millers would become wealthy.) Eleganter würde sein (nein, wäre): spuckten (Konj. Imperf.!). (Ditto (I suppose) were able rather than would be able)

2.1) Der Nebensatz im Konditionalkonstrukt (außer: Realis) steht im echten Konjunktiv (siehe 1.a1-3).

2.2) Echter Konjunktiv bei rein hypothetischen Erwägungen. Stell Dir vor, die gute Fee käme Dich heut nacht besuchen
(imagine the good fairy visiting you tonight). ...würde Dich heut nacht besuchen kommen statt dessen ist nicht gerade inkorrekt, aber ausgesprochen schwerfällige Umgangssprache.

2.3) Ein Wunschsatz: ...daß der Herrgott den Weg in den Himmel ihr bahne (Konjunktiv Präsens)

Edit: OP, nicht traurig sein, wenn ich nicht alle konjugierten Formen hier auflisten kann.
Für das Konditional und den Konjunktiv Perfekt und Plusquamperfekt muss man ohnehin nur die
Hilfsverben (könnte, würde, haben, sein) konjugieren: das steht sicherlich schon anderswo.

Extra pauken muss man die echten Konjunktiv-Verbformen für Präsens und Imperfekt
(Konj. Futur gibt's praktisch nicht IMHO) und natürlich sind die wichtigsten Verben
unregelmäßig und haben hier extra Sonderformen (wie für alles andere auch...)
Dennoch, hier ein Beispiel: kommen (to come):

Präsens: Indikativ --- Konjunktiv (schwer zu erkennen ohne Kontext, meist umschrieben)
ich komme --- ich komme (ich möge kommen)
du kommst --- du kommest (du mögest kommen)
er kommt --- er komme (er möge kommen)
wir kommen --- wir kommen (wir mögen kommen)
ihr kommt --- ihr kommet (ihr möget kommen)
sie kommen --- sie kommen (sie mögen kommen)

Imperfekt: Indikativ --- Konjunktiv
ich kam --- ich käme
du kamst --- du kämest
er kam --- er käme
wir kamen --- wir kämen
ihr kam(e)t --- ihr käm(e)t
sie kamen --- sie kämen

Originally Posted by feuersteve

Kind of like "verdammt" much stronger in German than English?

Even more so in this example. About like, the other way round, blutig (harmless, meaning just verbatim) vs. bl**dy (both "strong" and rather vulgar AFAIK).

Referring to: WO GIBT´s DENN SOWAS...

you could also say "don´t even think about it"


But Hein Blöd`s explanations are very good.

Originally Posted by Nachthart

seems weird that the word for girl would be nuetral but ok...I can dig it O,o (Yep, I can tell this language is going to be fun @,@)

The reason is that the german word, Mädchen, is a diminutive, and all diminutives are of neutral gender,
regardless where they stem from: Männchen, Weiblein, Häuschen, Prinzesschen, das Ländle (= der Regierungsbezirk Schwaben).

The original in this case is Maid (maiden, properly feminine): however, in these days this expression feels quite old-fashioned.
You may still encounter it in very cultivated written language, but nobody utilizes it in spoken language.

Is anybody able to provide a generic guideline for how to properly translate the German word family sicher/Sicherheit etc.? There are at least four English candidates, and I suppose that, most of the time, three of them will just sound plain wrong to the native speaker. Imagine examples like

• There are safety regulations (Sicherheitsrichtlinien) for construction sites (it's about concrete, after all )
• In IT we have to fix security holes (Sicherheitslöcher) (abstract)
• I'm not certain whether I can make it (Ich bin nicht sicher...) (?)
• A surgeon/watchmaker/precision mechanics needs a sure hand (eine sichere Hand).

but I cannot deduct a truly reliable rule from this. Any takers?

Oh, I forgot to supply an actual translation...

Originally Posted by Tahira

Referring to: WO GIBT´s DENN SOWAS...

you could also say "don´t even think about it"

Thanks! This expresses the vigorous rejection, yes.

Just curious: do you hold that this also transmits the needed (strong)
feeling of genuine resentment?

Originally Posted by Hein Blöd

Just curious: do you hold that this also transmits the needed (strong)
feeling of genuine resentment?

No, not really.
THis is a good example for showing, that you sometimes can only transfer the general meaning of an expression into another language but not the feeling behind it.

I also think that there are regional differences. I would never use the phrase "wo gibt´s denn sowas" in daily talk,
rather more "wo sind wir denn".
BUt now we are going into "colloquial phrases" :-)

Permit me to elaborate a bit...

Originally Posted by Luvya

In German, the usual sentence order is: Subject - Verb - Object.
Example: Ich lese ein Buch. (I read a book.)
Very similar to English, isn't it?

So far, so good. The difference is that, while this order is truly the default in English main clauses (in particular, the Verb - Object clause is virtually cast in iron and inseparable AFAIK), Germans use any excuse to deviate from it. In fact, one of the most reliable ways to give yourself away as a foreigner is to not know when to keep this order and when not to.

The most frequent deviation is the inversion of the Subject - Verb order in a main clause, simply called inversion. While trying to think of examples, it may even appear that the inversion is more frequent than the straight order itself. Leaving aside question clauses for the moment, the inversion is needed about every time a main clause starts with anything else than the Subject. Given that putting a word at the beginning of the sentence is one of the standard ways to put emphasis on it, this happens very often indeed. Some typical possibilities:

• Any leading adverbial clause triggers the inversion:
  
  • Morgens lese ich gern ein Buch. (in the morning I like to read a book). The leading position of the adverbial clause emphasizes it: the focus is on what I like to do in the morning.
  • Offensichtlich haben wir uns verfahren (obviously we got ourselves lost).
• Emphasis on the verb: Hat der alte Hexenmeister sich doch einmal wegbegeben. (Goethe, Zauberlehrling) (it so happened that the old master wizard had once gone out). This is the key cause for the ensuing dire events, therefore properly emphasized.
• Emphasis on the object: Das Buch muss ich aber wirklich morgen zurück in die Bibliothek bringen (I really, really have to return that book to the library to-morrow).
• Emphasis on just another part of the sentence: Ich glaub' es nicht -- hab ich doch schon wieder das Ziel verfehlt! (I can't believe it -- I missed the mark again!). The speaker is irked, and that's where he puts the focus on.
• Exception: A lone prefix Denn (engl. for) for a main clause (indicating a reason for the main clause preceding it) does not entail inversion: Morgen kann ich nicht. Denn ich habe schon andere Verpflichtungen. (I'm not available to-morrow. For I'm already under another obligation). This exception is very fragile, though: Morgen kann ich nicht. Denn da habe ich schon andere Verpflichtungen. (I'm not available to-morrow. For I'm already under another obligation then). The small addition of the temporal adverb da is enough to trigger an inversion after all.

Originally Posted by Luvya

You can put as many objects as you want into a sentence.
Example: Ich lese morgens im Bett ein Buch. (I read a book in bed in the morning.)
The order of the objects is not strict. You could also say:
Ich lese im Bett morgens ein Buch.
Ich lese morgens ein Buch im Bett.
Ich lese ein Buch morgens im Bett.
Just keep in mind that the focus is on the last object you cite. So it depends on wheter you want to point out that you read a book, that you read in bed or that you read in the morning.

Agreed: positioning something at the end of the sentence is another (more gentle) way to emphasize it (the inversion emphasizes more strongly, though). Rule of thumb: the stuff in the middle is the least important

Originally Posted by Luvya

Now the tricky part: subordinate clauses. Ever heard the rumour that the verb is in the very last position in German? Well, this is where that rumour comes from.
Indeed, a subordinate clause would look like that: Ich lache, wenn ich ein lustiges Buch lese. (I laugh when I read a funny book)
The main clause (Ich lache) is fine: the order is subject - object. The subordinate clause stars behind the comma with a conjunction (wenn) followed by the order Subject - Object - Verb.

And, of course, recursion is possible Extreme cases may prove too much even for trained Germans...

Hello!~, Excuse me ~ I'm taking German classes and we've started practicing some grammar , But guys may you help me if I got any question that bothers me ?! And thank you

how do you pronounce kiss me???

küss mich
küss: ü is like trying to say a "u" with your mouth in the shape of "e"...hard to explain
mich, the ch is not like chair, it's like the ch in the scottish loch

Hello everyone,

I'd like to start studying German & I wonder in what language it will be the easiest: my native language is Russian (that has conjugations, cases & other interesting grammar rules that make people who study it feel a little bit of headache :-)), I speak fluently English and French (I studied the last one mostly in English and it was quite easy to understand the explanations and the language's logic).

And today I face with German & it's interesting for me if it's worth to study it in English or French (since I believe there's much more of sources written in these languages) or in Russian (since our languages are pretty similar in grammar)?

Today I tried to find out what the difference between "dir" and "dich" is. Google translates both these words as "you", and I failed to find a good explanation in English. But when I searched for this in the ru-net I found the explanation quite fast and it was pretty clear that these two words are just different cases of "du".

So I wonder if such situation will happen in all other aspects or it was just an exception and English will be preferable.

Any ideas, advices or may be someone's experience are welcome and much appreciated :-)

Thanks.

Originally Posted by Samaretz

Hello everyone,

I'd like to start studying German & I wonder in what language it will be the easiest: my native language is Russian (that has conjugations, cases & other interesting grammar rules that make people who study it feel a little bit of headache :-)), I speak fluently English and French (I studied the last one mostly in English and it was quite easy to understand the explanations and the language's logic).

And today I face with German & it's interesting for me if it's worth to study it in English or French (since I believe there's much more of sources written in these languages) or in Russian (since our languages are pretty similar in grammar)?

Today I tried to find out what the difference between "dir" and "dich" is. Google translates both these words as "you", and I failed to find a good explanation in English. But when I searched for this in the ru-net I found the explanation quite fast and it was pretty clear that these two words are just different cases of "du".

So I wonder if such situation will happen in all other aspects or it was just an exception and English will be preferable.

Any ideas, advices or may be someone's experience are welcome and much appreciated :-)

Thanks.

I am not a native German speaker, but I suspect what might be confusing is the same for many English speakers: that is, there are TWO object cases is
German and many other languages, direct and indirect. English has only one object case (and I suspect also in Russian). French may be easier to understand this, however, English vocabulary is closer to German than French, I suspect.

The many dialects in German speaking countries are very different than Hochdeutsch also, very hard to understand. As they say: Was trennt uns ist die gemeinsame Sprache. LOL