German Grammar.

<<I don't fully understand the case system but I recognise the trigger words and their effects. >>

It really is not difficult to understand why cases exist. There is a logical reason.

For most of us, especially English speakers, we do not have any trouble differentiating between Subject and Object and Genitive. We have these in the form of "I", "me" and "my/mine".

It's Accusative vs. Dative that is tricky.

Think of it this way: Accusative takes the action of the verb; Dative is just there to add information.

To byspel,
I gave the man the book = [I (Nom)] + [gave] + [the man (Dat)] + [the book (Acc)]

"the book" is what you gave, not "the man" so it takes the action of the verb "give"

Dative can also be thought of as being more oblique or unrelated/necessary to the sentence. It has the meaning of "to/for"

This will help in a lot of situations, but not in all, as many verbs prefer one to another due to historical reasons, not logical reasons. Also, as someone pointed out above, certain prefixes take one or both, and , where both they change the meaning (eg. "Ich gehe in die Stadt" (I go into the city) dagegen "Ich gehe in der Stadt" (I go within the city)



<<Im Internet wird nicht gesiezt. So ist's besser:

Du kannst versuchen, deinen Sprachgebrauch hier zu üben/verbessern, indem du auf Deutsch schreibst.
Ein bisschen Praxis/Übung könnte mir auch nicht schaden!

Und bitte niemals ä, ö, u mit a, o, u ersetzen. Dann lieber ae, oe, ue. >>

Good to know;)! Merci!

<<unrelated/necessary >>

that should read "unrelated/unnecessary"

Cases are not a hard idea to grasp. Imagine if English were like this:


I bought this package for John. = I bought this package Johnfor.
I gave the food to the dog. = I gave the food dogto.
I wrote it with a pen. = I wrote it penwith.
I dumped the garbage on the man's face. = I dumped the garbage faceon manof.

<<I bought this package for John. = I bought this package Johnfor.
I gave the food to the dog. = I gave the food dogto.
I wrote it with a pen. = I wrote it penwith.
I dumped the garbage on the man's face. = I dumped the garbage faceon manof. >>

Wow! You make English like an agglutinative language!

That wis might help someone :)

English is actually harder, or at least more messy, when it comes to expressing the dative, or probably more accurately the indirect object.

What in German is always expressed through the dative form, is expressed through a weird mixture of prepositions and word order in English.

So you can say either:

'I gave him the book' or 'I gave the book to him'.

OK, fine if that was the extent of it, learners of English, once they grasp the structure, would have a choice.

But it's not the case.

Consider:

'I suggested a logical solution to him' So far so good. But 'I suggested him a logical solution'. No, somehow, the verb 'suggest' just won't allow the indirect object without 'to', word order just won't cut it.

In German it's always 'vorschlagen +dative' just like it's always 'geben +dative'. I'm not saying German never gets a bit more complicated, but I'm pretty sure if you compared all German verbs that take the dative and all English ones that demand an EXPRESSION of the dative, you would find a much more messed up 'system' in English, i.e. a weird habit that incorporates word order and prepositions with no real system, yet you have to get it right with certain verbs. German is much more systematic and logical. You aren't likely to go far wrong if you learn all the grammar rules of German, even though you might well sound quite rigid.

Just to clarify vorschlagen = suggest and geben = give. Both simply take the dative form in German, whereas in English 'give' allows its expression through either using the preposition 'to', or word order, while 'suggest' only allows its expression through the use of the preposition 'to'. Please don't tell me that German is harder in this instance, just because it incorporates a morphological change. And there are ample examples of verbs in English where you have to learn exactly which structure is appropriate.

<<In German it's always 'vorschlagen +dative' just like it's always 'geben +dative'. >>

Deutsch 'vorschlagen' und 'geben' geben dem Dativ nicht immer. Zum Beispiel:

"Er schlug eine gute Idee vor"

"Ich habe ein Buch gegeben"

suggest something (direct) to someone (indirect) = jemandem (=Dativ=) etwas (_Akkusativ_) vorschlagen
give something (direct) to someone (indirect) = jemandem (=Dativ=) etwas (_Akkusativ_) geben

Die beiden Wörter sind sowohl im Englischen als auch im Deutschen ditransitiv, das heißt, sie können zwei Objekte nach sich ziehen.

Beim Wort "geben" sollten auch immer zwei Objekte dabei sein. "Ich habe _ein Buch_ gegeben" klingt zwar nicht unbedingt ungrammatikalisch aber doch etwas komisch. Muttersprachler würden "Ich habe =ihm= _ein Buch_ gegeben" sagen.

Beim Wort "vorschlagen" kann der Akkusativ ohne Dativ stehen, der Dativ aber nicht ohne Akkusativ. "Er schlug _eine gute Idee_ vor" geht also, "Er schlug =ihm= vor" geht aber nicht. Stattdessen muss es "Er schlug =ihm= _etwas_ vor" heißen.
Hinzu kommt, dass bei "vorschlagen" das Akkusativ-Objekt auch in Form eines Objektsatzes oder einer Infinitivkonstruktion auftreten kann: "Er schlug =ihm= vor, _dass er sein Zimmer aufräumt_" oder "Er schlug =ihm= vor _sein Zimmer aufzuräumen_.

Läuft das im Englischen nicht ganz genauso?

>>Deutsch 'vorschlagen' und 'geben' geben dem Dativ nicht immer. Zum Beispiel:

"Er schlug eine gute Idee vor"

"Ich habe ein Buch gegeben" <<

OK, but I was talking about sentences where there is an indirect object and the difference between how the two languages express this.

>>Hinzu kommt, dass bei "vorschlagen" das Akkusativ-Objekt auch in Form eines Objektsatzes oder einer Infinitivkonstruktion auftreten kann: "Er schlug =ihm= vor, _dass er sein Zimmer aufräumt_" oder "Er schlug =ihm= vor _sein Zimmer aufzuräumen_.

Läuft das im Englischen nicht ganz genauso? <<

Well, I was going to say no, but now I'm having to think. 'He suggested to him to tidy his room' No, this definitely doesn't sound right. 'He suggested to him tidying his room'. Yes, I think I might say this. More usual would be with the subclause. But this is also interesting because in American English, the verb 'suggest' has to take the subjunctive, so you would get 'He suggested to him he TIDY his room'. Brits might say this, but you would also hear 'He suggested to him he TIDIED his room'. Strictly speaking this means something different though, doesn't it? The first is a suggestion, he might not actually tidy it. The second should really imply that the speaker suggested the idea that the person he is talking about had tidied his room. How does this work in German then? I see you used 'aufräumt' so therefore the present indicitive form of the verb. I suppose if you used 'aufräumte', that would also somehow imply that the tidying was already being or had been done.

<<I don't fully understand the case system

If you know well the grammar of your own language you could probably understand that! >>

But you don't analyse the grammar of your own language (unless you're a language nerd). You know it instinctively, but it's difficult to explain.

<<<<I bought this package for John. = I bought this package Johnfor.
I gave the food to the dog. = I gave the food dogto.
I wrote it with a pen. = I wrote it penwith.
I dumped the garbage on the man's face. = I dumped the garbage faceon manof. >>

Wow! You make English like an agglutinative language!>>

That's far form being really agglutinative!

<<"Ich gehe in der Stadt" (I go within the city)>>

That sounds a little weird. It would be better to say ''Ich gehe in der Stadt herum.'' or ''Ich bin in der Stadt herumgegangen.''

<<<<"Ich gehe in der Stadt" (I go within the city)>>

That sounds a little weird. It would be better to say ''Ich gehe in der Stadt herum.'' or ''Ich bin in der Stadt herumgegangen.'' >>



It may sound a little frempt but it does illustrate the point regarding the note of one case wither another.

>>How does this work in German then? I see you used 'aufräumt' so therefore the present indicitive form of the verb. I suppose if you used 'aufräumte', that would also somehow imply that the tidying was already being or had been done.<<

Da bin ich, ehrlich gesagt, selbst als Muttersprachler überfragt. Ich würde sagen, dass es zwar stimmt, dass "aufräumte" eher auf eine abgeschlossene Aktion schließen lässt als "aufräumt", dass es aber trotzdem nicht unbedingt der Fall sein muss.

Es klingt zwar nicht ungrammatikalisch, aber ich persönlich würde "aufräumte" wahrscheinlich auch dann nicht benutzen, wenn ich von einer abgeschlossenen Handlung spreche. Weil der Bedeutungsunterschied einfach nicht deutlich genug ist.

Ich kann mir aber gut vorstellen, dass andere Leute das ganz anders handhaben.

<<<<<<"Ich gehe in der Stadt" (I go within the city)>>

That sounds a little weird. It would be better to say ''Ich gehe in der Stadt herum.'' or ''Ich bin in der Stadt herumgegangen.'' >>

It may sound a little frempt but it does illustrate the point regarding the note of one case wither another.>>

No, it doesn't illustrate the point. It's just ungrammatical. But I know what you mean.