Hello everyone,
and welcome back to our Grammay special, this time as a normal post again, instead of a dictionary entry.. yeah, I know, I keep switching back and forth, but I just realized that you can’t mark the dictionary entries as “read”.
Anyway, today we’ll take a quick look at one of the most useless grammar terms ever… in teaching, anyway.
the prediCATe
Mrrreeoooww!
So are you ready to jump in?
Then let’s go.
***
What is a Predicate
I don’t know how common the word “predicate” is in the context of English grammar, but when you learn German, chances are that you will hear das Prädikat at some point, especially if you happen to have a teacher who’s a bit on the jargon side, because ...”tHoSe ArE tHe PrOpEr TeRmS!”.
They then typically use das Prädikat as if it is one of the most well known things on the planet. But the reality is that 95% of learners do not really know what a predicate is. I didn’t even really know it until I started writing this.
And if you’re now like “Yeah, I’m like totally in the elite 5%.” then let me tell you… I wouldn’t be so sure. Because there is something about the whole thing that you probably don’t know and that makes the term pretty useless for language learning.
As most grammar terms, predicate comes from Boring, and it’s a… oh… I mean, comes from Latin and it’s a combination of the prefix pre-, which is about “forth, in front, about” and the verb dicere. The origin of that is the disgustingly ancient Indo-European root *deik– which was about showing, which we can still see in the German offspring zeigen (to show) or the words index and indicate. But in Latin, it also took on the idea of “verbally showing”, which we can see in word like dictionary or predict.
And the original meaning of praedicatum was “what is said about a subject”, and that’s how it was used in grammar, as well.
So if I were to say that Thomas wears Maria’s jeans from time to time (not saying he does, just an example. He might, though.), that whole thing would be the predicate. So it’s basically anything BUT the subject.
Simple enough, right?
Well… no.
The problem with “predicate”
In context of language learning, grammar terms are often treated like they’re universal constants of the language universe.
But even though they usually come from Latin and look pretty much the same across languages, they do NOT always mean the same thing.
And predicate is one example for that. English grammar tends to use the classic Latin idea we just learned.
- Thomas [wants to drink a coffee in the sun].
But there are different “schools” in linguistics, and some have a different definition. They say that the predicate is ONLY the verbal phrase.
- Thomas [wants to drink] a coffee in the sun.
One source I found that talked about the predicate in English called this one the predicate and the first one the full predicate, because … yeah.. that’s not confusing at all.
Anyway, so German grammar generally uses the second definition of a predicate, so German the predicate is basically “all the verbs”. The reason is that the classic definition of the predicate didn’t really work for the underlying German structure and how German sees its verbs.
But anyway, while the term predicate is helpful in linguistics, it is so good a tool for language learning and teaching.
It’s just weird if there are conflicting definitions for stuff and you have to learn the definition AND the term. It’s much more fun to learn neither of them, and predicate is really not a term you’d miss.
Like… it’s not like conditional or past tense or conjugation. Those are things that people look up when the learn a language but I don’t think anyone looks up “how does predicate work in German”. No one cares. People would just say verb, or verbal phrase.
And as a teacher, I can also say that I can get by very well without using the word predicate. So yeah… my stance is that predicate is not useful in context of language learning and should disappear. Shoo, predi-cat, shoo, shoo.
But I’m a bit of a hater when it comes to grammar terms, so yeah… it’s really just my opinion :)
Cool, so now you know what a predicate is, and if your teacher likes using the term a lot, you could ask them some time if they’re aware that it’s not as universal and “clear” as they think.
If you have any questions or thoughts about this, let me know in the comments and also, let me know about your experiences with the term?
Did you know what it is? Does your teacher or textbook use it? And does your mother tongue have the term?
I’ll see you in the comment section, have a great day and bis bald :).
Audio Speed
Dark Mode
In my experience, Subject and Predicate were really the bread and butter of grammar class in English. I feel like I learned about them starting in fourth grade or so (age 9).
“Predicate” has always felt to me like a region of the sentence. And I only ever learned the “full predicate” definition. So when I went to learn German it felt like the predicate wouldn’t even land on the language at all, because it isn’t linear in the same way English is. That is, the subject doesn’t need to come earlier in the sentence. So sentences don’t fall as easily into two parts. {My very educated mother} {just served us nine pizza pies}… Of course English sentences can get more complex but the subject/predicate notion serves as a default format. Whereas German sentences don’t have this binarism, instead they have the center of gravity with the verb and then the… um… quantum stuff.
Anyway, based on my preconceptions, I’m actually surprised to hear it’s used in German at all. And… yeah, I don’t know that it’s particularly useful in English unless you just feel like mapping sentences in a binary way for some reason. I guess it’s a good way for students to learn to separate the idea of “nouns” from “subjects,” since of course predicates can contain nouns. (We learn subject and predicate before direct objects.) (I THINK??)
I think the first time we learnt about “das Prädikat” was in 7th grade when we had half a year of grammar. I really liked that topic and analyzing sentences, but “Prädikat” never really registered, neither in terms of what it is exactly or who would care.
What you said about it being a good way to divide a sentence in English makes a lot of sense.
But like so many grammar terms, it comes from Latin, which as far as I know had a REALLY liberal word order, so their conception of it must have been something different. For German learners nowadays, it really has nothing to offer though, imo :D
Why doesn’t this article have the option to mark it as read? I think I also found some other articles where I can’t click the Done button… This option must be included by default in all articles… :)
I can’t auto-allow it and sometimes I forget. Should work now…
Hi Manu,
I have the same problem as others: this article will not load (quota error message) even though I am logged-in. I have gone to the direct link (https://yourdailygerman.com/predicate-meaning) and so-on. I think it is just this article with the problem, because I am able to read other articles.
That is sooo weird! I have categorized it as “random” now. That should “free” it, because posts in “random” are not hidden. Let me know if that works now.
Yep, it works now, thanks, now I can finally resolve the mystery of the predicate! ;)
I haven’t read this blog for long time, but it still says that I have used of my free quotas for the week…
I have a problem with my email system. Whenever you come from email, it’ll treat you as if you’ve used up the quota.
I think when you go to this link, it should work:
https://yourdailygerman.com/predicate-meaning/
Guten Morgen, FYI, the link didn’t work either, as I get the same note as Ruth…
Hi Emanuel,
I’m blocked from reading this article for some reason, even though I’m a member. https://photos.app.goo.gl/a1cEfTyX8LBxvRjd6. Downloading as PDF still works fine, and I can still read other articles.
Danke!
I can’t read this post too, even if I’m logged.
I assume you came from the newsletter directly, right?
The newsletter messes with the URL and that messes with my membership system :/.
Could you try the direct link:
https://yourdailygerman.com/predicate-meaning/
Let me know if this works.
Hi Emanuel, a little feedback for you: you’re right, I entered the site from the newsletter as usual (never had any problems with hidden posts before). Now everything works well.
I log myself from the email regularly, I think this situation was related to this post only. I’m late but I hope this is useful to you.
Alles in Ordnung! Vielen Dank!
I noticed that when I post something, then hit the button, I see the words “awaiting for approval” next to my name. It should say “awaiting approval”.
With all due respect, while the words “wait” and “await” pretty much mean the same thing, the word “for” does not go with “await”. Here’s an example:
“Awaiting the birth of his first child, Michael Phelps has decided to skip an Olympic prep meet in Atlanta next week.”
Here’s another example (an old proverb):
https://writingexplained.org/awaiting-vs-waiting-difference
Hey, thanks a lot!
In my defense… this was actually a mistake in the software that organizes the comment.
I fixed it now :).
Two days ago, I got an email from Emanuel in which the phrase “heute mal” was used. What is the difference between “heute” and “heute mal”?
You’re asking the wrong question.
The “heute” has nothing to do with it. What you need to understand is what “mal” can do in a sentence.
Here, it adds a “casual” tone.
For more, check out my article on “mal” ;)
I remember, when we started to learn English (… looooong time ago …)
one of the first rules, we had to learn, was the general sentence structure in English:
“SPO”
= Subjekt-Prädikat-Objekt
;-)
I just wanted to thank everyone here for helping me out with the membership subscription I really like this blog and it is super helpful , thankfully now with your help ill be able to learn German thoroughly and clear all my doubts .thanks again Emanuel
Thanku all. especially Emanuel
Thanks a lot to those amazing people paying a little extra so people who couldn’t pay like me could still get a chance to learn!! it really means a lot! I’m so grateful guys :)
I think this touches on that magical thing Sprachgefühl. If only I thought like german speakers do, if only I could express myself naturally as they do. If only I didn’t stumble about and splutter while the good people of Munich look on me with pity and then reply to me in very good English.
Hahahag
Eh, their English isn’t that great here ;D
or their German either XD
YES! I agree!
I’m having a hard time thinking back to 4th grade or whenever it was, but I think I learned “predicate” as “everything that’s not the subject.”
I don’t know if it’s useless for learning, but it really is just an incredibly broad term. Basically:
Cool, but predicate really is just shorthand for “whatever the sentence says about whatever the sentence is about.”
Damn, you guys have grammar so early!!! I think it’s too early for a 4th grader, to be honest. Grammar should be taught back to back with sex ed. Or intertwined maybe. The pinnacle of pedagogic, if someone can pull it off.
I mean, my oldest is in 2nd grade here, just a normal public school, and they’re definitely doing at least a lot of “find the nouns, find the verbs, find the adjectives” sort of exercises in German. I’ll try to keep track of what sorts of grammar concepts he’s getting at various stages…
But I think there is a real difference between teaching grammar to primarily native speakers who can speak and read already and hitting second-language learners with all the jargon. The idea with grammar in elementary education is that you’re preparing them to take apart more challenging texts whose meaning will be less obvious when they first encounter them, and to help them understand what makes for good style.
A lot probably depends on how you present and explain the concepts, but I think there’s plenty of value in learning early on to take apart your own language and see how it works.
Now I’m really curious if I actually did that in elementary school. I might have, but I have ZERO recollection of it. What I do remember is grammar in 7th grade and how I really like it. Much more interesting than all the boring literature we’d do later, in German.
I remember also learning between 4th and 6th grade those terms. In Spanish we use that broad concepts, where each of them has a ‘nucleus’. The nucleus of the subject is a noun or pronoun and the nucleus of the predicate is a verb.
Although we don’t use sentence analysis in everyday life, the core idea is that the objects in each of them match with their respective nuclei and the nuclei match between themselves in gender and number (no cases, luckily).
Also, with that, we learnt the different “blocks”, mentioned in another article here, and the possible rearrangements as well.
So, perhaps the concept of predicate doesn’t remain useful itself, but in the process we acquire the skills for proper redaction.
Why can’t I mark this as read? :(
Also, i never knew what predicate meant, and i still don’t, and i hopefully never will ^^
Whops, you should be able to mark it now. I forgot to enable it.
Mark it and forget it :)
I never had a problem replacing “predicate” with “verb.” Except with crossword puzzles.
The definition that always made the most sense to me is – verbs are a type of word, and the predicate is the role the verb (or something else) can take on in a sentence, basically saying what happens to the subject. Which I still think is too abstract to be useful in daily life, but maybe it could come in handy if you need a framework to look at how different languages work. So in English you could take a sentence like “I am happy” and say, OK, the verb is doing its verb thing here, but in Turkish a suffix does that job. Although you really don’t need a fancy word to explain that.
The thing I can’t get my head around is the theory about predicates that tries to divide a sentence into a noun box and verb box. Why, just because a philosopher said some stuff about philosophy a couple thousand years ago? It seems artificial and not useful. If I take an example:
You shouldn’t walk on the pavement barefoot when it’s 100F (40C, ish?) outside. (totally hypothetical example)
The theory would basically tell me that “you” is the subject and the rest of the sentence isn’t. Gee, thanks. But if you assume that the verb is the “center” of the sentence, you can come up with a pretty easy way to see how the different parts relate to each other. Just gotta ask who, what, when, where, why, how.
Who shouldn’t walk? You. Walk where? On the pavement. Walk how? Barefoot. Walk when? When it’s 100F outside.
To me, that’s a lot more intuitive, plus it gives you a good jumping off place to explain the grammar terms that don’t make people want to stick a fork in their face, or at least not as much as the high-falutin’ $20 words.
I know I’m preaching to the choir, but that theory
really grinds my gearsI totally don’t have strong feelings about it or anything.“But if you assume that the verb is the “center” of the sentence, you can come up with a pretty easy way to see how the different parts relate to each other. Just gotta ask who, what, when, where, why, how.
Who shouldn’t walk? You. Walk where? On the pavement. Walk how? Barefoot. Walk when? When it’s 100F outside.”
I definitely like this. It immediately sounds more widely useful than any framework I’ve been subjected to before. No idea if it could be universally applied. Knowing how languages work, especially after Emanuel has pointed out this predicate detail, probably not.
That old fork-in-the-face feeling is enough to discourage even the most dedicated linguaphile. For me it was the names of the verb tenses and moods. I’m not sure I’ve got those down even yet – they keep changing across languages.
What I do like, over all, is the eventual appearance of the magic Sprachgefuehl – after that you don’t have to be concerned about predicates and whatnot so much. :-D
Yeah, there’s something about verbs and complicated labels. I like to come up with my own names based on what the different forms do. Kind of like Friends episodes. “Konjunktiv I” doesn’t stick in my brain too well, but I can remember “the one where you mark that someone else said something.” If I tack on an example, I’m usually good.
Das Känguru sagt, es habe mein Jojo nicht kaputt gemacht.
And then it feels like I’m freeing up a tiny bit of brain power for stuff like remembering genders.
The feeling when things finally start to click is the best. Definitely makes up for the times when it feels like you took an egg beater to the brain.
Have you read the Känguru-Chroniken or where does this example idea come from :)?
Yeah, I’m in the middle of re-reading it :) Listening, actually, the audiobook is fantastic.
I saw him life at a “Lesebühne” way back before he got famous. *bragg off
“For me it was the names of the verb tenses and moods.”
Hahaha, then you’ve found a pretty safe place in German, I feel like. Not so many terms to learn there :). But yeah, my favorite is Konjunktiv/Subjunctive/Conditional.
Even though I have written about it, I can’t keep it to stick what’s what and what language has which.
Yeah, I found time and time again, that using questions is a really good way to understand grammatical roles (except using wen and wem to ask for cases … that’s useless).
Weren’t you the person who had studied a share of Ancient Greek? (sorry if I mix people up here)
I would think/have thought that this “subject vs non-subject” dichotomy would lend itself more to Ancient Greek.
berlingrabers started the discussion and then I jumped in. I don’t know much about Ancient Greek, just enough to convince me that German is definitely easier, but yeah, it makes sense that Aristotle would have had a really different lens for looking at the world.
To be clear, I’ve studied some Koine Greek, which is what the New Testament is written in – there’s a pretty big difference between that (from the Hellenistic period, about 3rd century BC onward) and Attic (i.e. really actually classical Ancient Greek) from earlier. Koine means “common,” so it’s a pretty heavily simplified version of the language. I’d be pretty lost if I sat down and tried to read Aristotle in the original.
I’m not sure I’ve thought enough about it to know how strong a “subject vs. non-subject” dichotomy there is. At least in Koine, there’s some weird fluidity with cases that takes some mind-yoga. Like, in a sentence like this:
…the subject of the side sentence, “Thomas,” would be in genitive (instead of a verb “was walking,” though, it would just be a genitive participle walking – in German, some monstrosity like “Des Thomas im Park laufend…”). Which maybe would support the idea that you’re marking the subject of the main sentence, the nominative unicorn, more clearly as subject and distinguishing it from everything else.
What’s weird is that the subject of an infinitive is in accusative. So like:
…might be phrased something like “During the unicorn’s running [in Greek, this would be an infinitive like in German beim Laufen] past Thomas, it stole his bike.” But “unicorn” would be in accusative, even though it’s clearly the subject of both sentences.
I don’t know if that helps or hurts. I’m sure in full-on Classical Greek, it’s even crazier.
Huh. That’s so completely different than anything I’m used to. Neat, though. Thanks for the examples!
(P.S. I’m logged in and this article says I reached the 2 post limit. Just this article though.)
I agree that the term is initially confusing because of the different meanings. Perhaps it becomes useful for an advanced learner who’s aiming to improve accuracy e.g. in case forms. It gives them an extra tool.
I have no idea what predicate even means for English grammar, and I’ve been speaking that perfectly my whole life! Seems to be something that academics would write essays about that has absolutely no relevance to everyone else. I’m not into existentialism but pragmatism: In what situation would knowing what a predicate is assist in knowing how to say something? In English this is none. Seems to be the same in German.
It depends how you use the term. It can be helpful in language teaching. Emmanuel makes a good point that it’s not necessary for a teacher to insist on teaching all grammatical categories. There’s more than one way to skin a cat. But more advanced language users can benefit from them. And some grammatical categories – like cases of nouns – need to be taught early.
Oh absolutely agree. Some terms are necessary tools, others not so much. At least for a beginner.
What courses and book in my experience usually fail to realize is that like at least two thirds of the students do not really know these terms. A quick introduction and a reasoning WHY it’s good to know that one, can go a long way.
“In what situation would knowing what a predicate is assist in knowing how to say something?”
I absolutely agree. I think it’s a good tool for higher level analysis but it should be kept out of language learning.
Hey by the way… whenever you get a newsletter from me, I get an empty email back from you. Like and “out of office” reply, but there’s nothing in it.
Doesn’t bother me at all, but I thought I’d take the chance mention it :)
In the Romanian gymnasium school, students learn the following definition for the term predicate:
“Predicatul este…” oh no, not in Romanian, better in English: Predicate is the main part of the sentence, which shows an action, a state or an attribute of the subject.
There are two types of predicate
Verbal predicate = predicate expressed by a predicative verb (or by an interjection).
Nominal predicate = predicate expressed by a copulative verb and a predicative noun. (Copulative verbs: to be, to become, …; they do not make sense alone)
In our country, when we do a grammar analysis in school and analyze it from the point of view of syntax, we can have the following two examples of predicates:
Verbal predicate: “Thomas [works] hard every day.”;
Nominal predicate: “Thomas [is a] handsome [worker].” (Here, “is a worker” is a nominal predicate, “is” is the copulative verb, and “a worker” is the predicative noun; both elements constitute together the predicate of the sentence.)
So looks like you’re using the same system as German grammar uses.
The definition you mentioned however… that’s just pure grammar jargon gold :). It’s sooooo unclear and vague once you think about it.
indeed, For learning a language, I believe now, that the term predicate is useless.
The same happens in Italian
Of course, I learned about the predicate, especially from being taught how to diagram sentences. That instruction was given in the sixth grate in Boston public schools. There is also the predicate nominative, which is abjured by most Americans: It is I; it is not we; is it they?
I certainly got a lot out of diagramming sentences. However, my son is a linguophile like me, and he says it didn’t enlighten him at all. Partly, I think, is because the grammar definitions aren’t as precise as they might be. And undoubtedly they can’t be tightened up, as Emanuel has pointed out.
And you’re right about these predicate nominatives – and that’s just the way the language changes. I might not like it particularly, but I certainly can’t stop it. :-)
“and he says it didn’t enlighten him at all.”
I can relate. I find these diagrams really boring and superfluously complicated. But then again, I’m not a linguist, so I most certainly don’t see their necessity because I simply don’t know the problem they’re solving (and they do solve a problem, or else they wouldn’t exist).
That’s what Son said, he didn’t see the problem the diagrams were solving. For me the diagrams were a visual thing that helped me keep track of the dynamics of the sentence. They aren’t particularly useful to me any more.
I’m English and I would say “It is I” only to sound ironically pompous! It makes more sense to define “me” as the basic form, with the only exception being “I” for the nominative when used with its main verb.
That would be quite a twist on “standard” grammar then :). I feel like being a linguist in English is MUCH harder than in German, because English comes up with so many special cases and weird little quirks that it gets hard to describe.
This also shows through the fact how much English speakers can argue about English.
That particular quirk isn’t unique to English, though, is it? C’est moi, if I remember my 9th-grade French correctly…
Yeah, the old arch enemies share the same structure there :).
I wasn’t referring to the structure though, but to the idea of calling “me” the default form and “I” the nominative exception.
Wait, whaaaat?! You did these grammar sentence trees in 6th grade?? Wow, I’m impressed. We had our grammar in 7th grade but we didn’t go that far :)
This subject gives me a Prädikater.
Hahahahaha :D!