Hello everyone,
and welcome to the second part of our deep dive about
German Word Order
In part one, I kind of gave you a first overview over the topic and now we’ll zoom in and really look at things in detail.
Doesn’t sound like much, but much it actually was.
And I think it’s good to hear it more than once, phrased in more than one way, let’s kick today’s lesson off with a proper recap.
Ready?
Then let’s jump right in.
German Word Order – Recap
1. There are no rules
Many textbooks and sources make it seem like there are a bunch of rules that regulate word order, like “Te-Ka-Mo-Lo” or “Dative-Accusative, except when pronouns, then Accusative-Dative”.
But this is fundamentally wrong!
These things are not rules. They are just TRENDS that are the result of what’s really going on, and there are millions of “exceptions” to these “rules” because of that.
2. Word Order is an interplay of forces and tension
German Word Order doesn’t follow fixed rules and there is not the one correct order.
Instead, the order elements have in a sentence is the result of the interplay of 3 different forces.
- Old vs New
- Informationally “low” vs “loaded”
- Relevance for the verb
We’ll look at all three in detail, don’t worry.
3 . Neutral Order and Tension
These forces balance out and pull the elements into what we could call the “neutral order”. Or neutral orders because sometimes more than one.
If we then go and move an element to a different spot, we introduce extra tension. And that tension can show up as emphasis or as “this sounds wrong”, depending on how strong it is and whether an emphasis makes sense.
This is universal, by the way… deviating from normal creates tension, and this can either be seen as “interesting” or “wrong”.
Here’s an example. Imagine me saying this to you:
- Excuse me, where is the restROOM?
I deviated from “normal” by adding a strong emphasis on room. Your brain will try to make sense of this, but it’s so weird that it may just leave you confused. Like: “Why did he say ROOM? This is not how it’s said. This is wrong.”
Moving an element around can be a great emphasis in one sentence and a mistake in another.
You can’t really “learn” a set of rules and then just go and order every German sentence properly. You do need to understand the principles and then give it some time to develop a “feeling” for it.
But trust me… this is actually really rewarding and you won’t run into thousands of sentences that “break the rules” you learned.
Everything will kind of make sense, and you’ll just flow.
Anyway, this completes the recap.
We left off in part one with the linguistic concept of ‘head-final’, a concept you’ll never hear from a teacher, textbook or Youtube video. But it is the absolute key to German Word Order.
And that’s where we’ll pick up today.
German Verbs are ‘head-final’
One quick word before we start. When they do structure analysis in linguistics they actually use the side sentence form. So instead of analyzing
- Ich gehe in den Park.
they analyze
- (Ich sage), dass ich in den Park gehe.
The reason is that position 1 is kind of special, as is the verb in position number two. The real order of stuff is much clearer in the side sentence structure. But it’s a bit unnatural and we want to know how “normal” sentences are built, so we won’t go that far. But we’ll ignore position 1 here for now. It’s kind of special and it would just make things a lot more confusing. I’ll just put a very natural element in there. I know the legend says that stuff gets put there for emphasis but that is about as accurate as the TeKaMoLo-garbage… oh. Ops… I guess you know my real opinion now.
Anyway, let’s see if head-final is any better.
That’s what she said, by the way.
Head-final basically means knowing what your beer tastes like before you even know it’s a beer.
- Ich trinke ein kaltes, leicht bitteres, im Abgang ein wenig an Zitronen erinnerndes Bier.
- I’m drinking a cold, slightly bitter beer reminiscent of lemon in the finish.
The specifics come before the main thing. And all we have to do is to generalize that a bit to get the fundamental principle of German sentence structure:
The more interesting, relevant and defining something is, the later it comes.
This is quite long and we can’t make a cool acronym so we’ll refer to it as … unicorn wisdom. We could call it fundamental principle, I guess, but that term makes me tired and my mouth dry. So… unicorn wisdom. There’s really not much to explain about the sentence itself. But it’s really powerful. Watch.
- Ich bin blah blah yada yada yada blah blah gegangen.
- I went blah blah blah ……
(the English version nicely shows that English is head-first)
Tadahhh… now we know why the verb is at the very end. Because the verb is the most important, most interesting and most defining part of a sentence. And now we also know why the prefix is at the end.
- Ich mache das Fenster ____ .
Because besides the verb itself, the prefix is the next most defining part. We can’t even translate the example yet because we effectively do NOT know what’s going on.
So this is head-final at it’s best. And it doesn’t stop there. Next to the verb or the prefix is the element that is most defining, most important for it.
So what say we look at a few examples to get a feel for it.
Getting comfy with it
Let’s take the verb to be.If I walk up to you and say
- I am.
A first question you might ask could be where or what … but certainly not when or why. So if if we want to say “I was in the park yesterday” the most natural order in German is this:
- Ich war gestern im Park.
while:
- Ich war im Park gestern.
is quite odd. Not wrong. There’s just a lot of tension because where is much more relevant for to be than when. So we’d really need a strong context to move around the boxes like this.
Now take a look at this example
- Ich war müde im Büro.
- Ich war im Büro müde.
Here, we have where and what (how), both quite relevant questions for to be. And here we can move around the elements WITHOUT creating all that much tension. We’re just shifting the focus.
- I was at the office, all tired.
- I was tired at the office.
The first sentence tells us where I was with an added specific about how. The second tells us how I was with an added specific where.
All right. The next example is a little more clear. Here are the parts:
- trinken
- ich
- ein Bier
- im Park
- gestern.
Beside the verb and the subject (which we’ll ignore) we have information about when, where and what in here. And by default the most relevant part is… what. Just imagine I come to you and completely out of the blue I say
- I drink.
You’d probably ask what. Well, okay… you might also be like “I’m sorry. Are you going to meetings?”, but anyway. The what is more interesting, more defining than when or where and that’s why in the default order the beer comes final
- Ich habe gestern im Park ein Bier getrunken.
- I drank a beer yesterday in the park.
We can move something after the beer. For instance the park. But that would create quite some tension and we’d need a proper context to “hold” the pieces there.
- Ich habe gestern ein Bier im Park getrunken, (aber nicht in der Bar.)
- I had a beer in the PARK yesterday, but not in the bar.
And what about time and place. Could we switch them up here? Yes, we actually could
- Ich habe gestern im Park…
- Ich habe im Park gestern…
The first version sounds a little bit more natural though. Now, this might sound crazy but I think it’s because for a human being, or for any animal for that matter location is more important than time. You can see location. If you’re not able to orient in a 3-dimensional space, you’ll have serious problems catching your food or building a house or walking through a door. But you can live without the notion of time just fine. Sure, these days time is tremendoublah blah blah… language is so old that it would make sense that place has a notch of importance more than time.
It certainly does in the next example which represents a big group of verbs: the movement verbs. Again, here are our parts:
- gehen
- ich
- am Freitag
- in den Park
- zum Trainieren (for a work)
- mit Maria
Besides the verb and the subject we have when, where, why and how(with whom). And now guess what’s the most important… of course. The where. If I walk up to you and tell you without ANY context
- I’ll fly.
your reaction would probably be “Oh, where?”. Well okay, you might also be like “Have you been drinking?” but anyway. When we talk about a movement, and also about a position-verb by the way, the most defining thing is naturally the location. And so in the default version of the sentence the park has to come as far right as possible. And in this case, since there are no left-overs of the verb, it’ll be at the very end.
- Ich gehe am Freitag zum Trainieren mit Maria in den Park.
We can move one of the other behind it.
- Ich gehe am Freitag mit Maria in den Park zum Trainieren.
But that would create quite some tension and again, we’d need a special context for the why to be more important than the where.
- … in den Park zum Trainieren. Nicht zum chillen.
So.. park has to be final. But what about the rest. The info about when I go, why I go, and how (with whom) I go. Well… the truth is these elements are all equal. None is automatically more interesting than the other. It totally depends on my personal focus. And that’s why we can arrange them in all possible orders and we’re barely creating any serious tension or emphasis. Whatever comes later just sounds a bit more defining for the verb.
- Ich gehe mit einer Freundin zum Trainieren am Freitag in den Park.
- Ich gehe mit einer Freundin am Freitag zum Trainieren in den Park
- Ich gehe zum Trainieren am Freitag mit einer Freundin in den Park.
- … (I’ll just skip the rest but it’s 6 in total)
They all mean exactly the same and they all feel perfectly natural. And the emphasis on the later element is really just a nuance here.
Cool.
Now before we go on into trickier territory let’s do one more example. I just told you my theory about how time is generally not as important as place. But in the right context it can be.
- aufgehen
- die Sonne
- in Berlin
- um 7.
Aufgehen, among other things, means to rise and in context with the sun, the more interesting question is when. Because the sun rises everywhere. But not at the same time.
- Die Sonne geht in Berlin um 7 auf.
- The sun rises at 7 in Berlin.
(English again has the reverse order, because it is head first)
We could say
- Die Sonne geht um 7 in Berlin auf.
But we’d have some tension and thus a rather strong focus on Berlin as opposed to elsewhere. It’s not wrong, but it’s not the most natural way to say it.
All right.
So I hope you got a first impression of the whole unicorn wisdom-approach. But of course it’s not quite that simple.
Getting less comfy with it
Let’s start right with an example:
- geben
- ich
- einen Kuss
- meiner Freundin
- im Supermarkt
- gestern
In English, we could assemble that to
- I gave my girlfriend a kiss in the supermarket yesterday.
And in German? Well, the most relevant info for geben is certainly the answer to what. Like… if I said
- I give
You’d probably ask what. So the kiss should be at the end, right before the verb. Cool. Now about the other stuff. Imagine I walk up to you and say
- I gave a kiss.
the most natural question would be to whom. So my girlfriend should come right before kiss because the question-test suggests that it’s the next most rele… oh hold on, there’s the solution already.
- Ich habe meiner Freundin gestern im Supermarkt einen Kuss gegeben.
Oh. Okay. … uhm…. the girlfriend comes kind of prematurely… I mean early. This is weird… uh… and what would happen if we moved her
- Ich habe gestern im Supermarkt meiner Freundin einen Kuss gegeben.
Uh-huh…. I see. So there’s a slight emphasis there. So both positions seem to work okay and the first one, the one with the early girlfriend seems a teeny tiny bit more natural to me.
This is a bit irritating.
And in fact it’s not only here. Any example where there’s a transfer of sorts will have the receiver rather early in the default order.
- Ich habe meinem Boss gestern beim Meeting meine Meinung gesagt…. most natural
- Ich habe gestern beim Meeting meinem Boss meine Meinung gesagt…. slight emphasis on boss.
- I told my boss my opinion at the meeting yesterday.
- Ich habe meiner Freundin vor zwei Wochen zum Geburtstag eine Waage gekauft…. most natural
- Ich habe vor zwei Wochen zum Geburtstag meiner Freundin eine Waage gekauft…. sounds wrongish
- I bought a scale for my girlfriend’s birthday two weeks ago.
This raised her eyebrow. And for us it raises some questions. Let’s raise some more.
Getting quite uncomfy with it
It was stupid idea. The scale. My girlfriend wasn’t amused at all. And so I gave it away.
- I gave the scale to a friend
It’s just geben and two elements so we should be good, rigtht? We can do that. The scale is the most defining element for geben so the natural order must be….
- Ich habe die Waage einem Freund gegeben.
WHAT? This is totally the reverse of what I expected. And this is the default? What about the other way around?
- Ich habe einem Freund die Waage gegeben.
Whaaaaaaat? Tension on friend?!?! I’m really starting to think German is trying to mess with me.
And there’s more. Take this example.
- Ich habe am Montag im Supermarkt ein Brot gekauft.
- I bought a loaf of bread in the supermarket on Monday.
This is nothing surprising. The most defining element for buying is certainly the info about what I buy and it comes where it should… at the end. What happens if we move it?
- Ich habe ein Brot gestern im Supermarkt gekauft…unnatural
This isn’t a surprise either. We have a lot of tension here, which creates a lot of emphasis which only makes sense if we want to contrast the supermarket with something. Like… I bought my bread IN THE SUPERMARKET as opposed to THE BAKERY. But…All it takes to change everything is changing one little word.
- Ich habe das Brot gestern im Supermarkt gekauft.
Poooooooof. All the tension unnatural tension is gone. The supermarket is the most relevant item here too. It’s at the end after all. But this is the default order now and having das Brot final is the version with unnatural tension.
- Ich habe gestern im Supermarkt das Brot gekauft.
Everyone would be wondering … “What bread?”.
And then, there’s of course that thing we’ve ignored all the time. The subject. I mean… if I just said
- drinks
wouldn’t be the natural reaction to ask who? Okay, well… I guess the most natural reaction is “Sure thing.”. But you know what mean.
So… at this point I think it’s totally natural to have reservations regarding unicorn wisdom. I would have them for sure. But unicorn wisdom isn’t to blame. It’s us. We’ve made a mistake. We forgot something. Because where there’s light, there is also shadow. Where there’s left, there’s also right. And where there’s late, there’s also early. Everything has two sides. Yin and Yang. We need to find the other side of unicorn wisdom. We have one part of the magical gem. We need the other part. For only together we can unlock their full power. So we shall venture out and meet again…. next week :).
Sorry for pulling a Hollywood franchise on you and making a part 3. I actually wanted to do just one post but that would have been really really superficial. And then I wanted to do just two posts but I am really bad at planning and I think we’ve done enough for today anyway.
I really hope this was not too detailed or too nerdy, so let me know in the comments if it was at least a little bit helpful. And of course if you have any questions please bombard me.
So… this was part two of our look at German word order and what we’ve done is… raise more questions than we answered :)
I hope you liked it and see you next time.
If you want to get to part 3, then head over here:
German Word Order – part 3 – “The pesky details”
If you need a break… go to your fridge. There’s a beer waiting.
Audio Speed
Dark Mode
Is because German is a head-final language the same reason the numbers are “backwards.” For example it’s fünfundzwanzig because the more important part of the number is the zwanzig and the fünf is meerly the peanuts added on?
Very possible, yes.
The right to left Satzbau guidance in the Unicorn model really resonates with me. Initially I suspect I will be pausing a little more (vis a vis TKML) to adjust the placement of the information in the correct place, but the idea of identifying a hierarchy of answer(s) to the question consequential to the verb makes sense. My only suggestion for improvement (to the article) is to explain the tension in the ‘ein brot’ v ‘das brot’ (at the end of the sentence) example a little further. I needed to place myself in a conversation where I could visualise THE loaf of bread I bought standing on a kitchen bench, versus A loaf of bread I bought being somewhere in the vicinity but not necessarily visible, in order to understand the tension i think you are referring to.
This series is definitely due for an edit.
I’d have to read it again to really know which part you’re talking about with the bread, but in a nutshell, “das Brot” implies there’s a specific bread, either one you point at, or one that has been established in the conversation. “ein Brot” is unspecified and often a “new piece of info”.
I would really recommend reading my two articles on the placement of “nicht”, as those use the same underlying paradigm and they’re newer and more precise in wording.
I would recommend against thinking of it as a strict hierarchy and working with questions works, but there’s a lot of room for rationalizations as well.
The key thing to understand is that things of the “scene” come on the left and things that are “new” come on the right.
– Ich habe das Brot gestern im Supermarkt gekauft.
This is perfect if for instance you asked me where I bought “the bread”.
– Ich habe gestern im Supermarkt ein Brot gekauft.
Here, “a bread” is new information and it’s VERY defining for the verb to buy, so its most natural spot is on the right.
Does that help a bit?
I’m a for-life member and I’ve been with you for half a year and am scoring zero in both verbs and grammar. What do I do or where do I go to begin sectional learning and then taking the (I guess) test/tests? Also, do I open the site, say each time, per the URL above?
Hey Nick, I think I need some help understanding what you mean!
“am scoring zero in both verbs and grammar”
What do you mean by that? In what tests are you scoring 0?
“where do I go to begin sectional learning”
So best way is to go to the grammar section (in the menu “grammar” ) and then pick whichever area/module you find interesting. YOu need to know “the essentials” before it makes sense to look at other stuff.
“and then taking the (I guess) test/tests?”
Not sure what you mean here.
As for the URL… my site is not an app and not a closely organized course. Think of it as a library that you go into. The url doesn’t really matter in terms of your progress or progression.
Does that help a bit?
Ich gehe am Freitag zum Trainieren mit Maria in den Park.
kann man sagt, dass “zum Trainieren mit Maria” zum „Warum“-Boxen behört.
Ich gehe am Freitag mit Maria in den Park zum Trainieren.
und heir “mit maria” hat eine bestimmte box :es ist “mit wem” box
Das meint, dass Maria unterwegs mit mir zum Trainieren geht.
Aber beim ersten Beispiel, ich treffe Maria im GYM.
Wow, sehr gut Gedanken.
I’ll do English, so more people can read this because it’s really interesting
– zum Trainieren mit Maria
You can read this as one or two boxes. If a speaker wanted “mit Maria” to be a specifier for the training, then they’d probably say “zum Training mit Maria”, but also the way I phrased it is ambiguous. It’s not clear whether she is there already and we only train together or if we GO together.
But when you move “mit Maria” further left, it does indeed become clear that you GO together.
– … in den Park zum Trainieren.
This doesn’t sound horrible, but “Zum Trainieren” does sound a bit like an apendix, a choda. Which is a common “rhythm” in spoken German and getting more popular.
Does that help?
I feel like you have a REALLY good understanding/feeling of this already! Congratulations!
Hi Emanuel
For this sentence “Do we learn tomorrow afternoon together?”
Stress is on the verb ” lernen” so as per head final rule. Correct sentence should be this ” Wir morgen nachmittag zusammen lernen?”
Is it right?
Also, can you please make some series on ” conjugation” explaining how to use- aber,und,weil,dass,dann,wenn and all nerdy connectors;)
No, you have to follow the rule for how to build a question in German.
– Lernen wir morgen nachmittag zusammen?
Can I find this topic here? How to build questions in German. Also, can you please explain ‘ Conjugation’ topic?
I will be appearing for the A1-A2 exam in this April month. Scoring marks is not my goal, all I want is that I should be able to express myself in this language. I want to emerge myself and think like a native German speaker in that way only I think I can excel in this language.
Can you please give some suggestions on how I should use this 1 month where I can learn plus make myself ready to take exams?
PS; 3 exams will be there( grammar, writing, viva) and I’m scared for the Viva portion. Any tips for that too?
Here’s the article about asking questions (part 1):
https://yourdailygerman.com/german-question-words/
The other thing you mean are “conjunctions” and I don’t have an article specifically for that.
Learn as much basic vocabulary as possible and try to create SIMPLE sentences with verbs. Forget ALL English phrasings that you know and just do “I do x because y” kind of stuff.
What’s viva?
Cool I’ll check that series.
Can you please make some series on “Conjunctions”. Take it as a topic for next week blog ;) please !!
Can you give one example for same I e ” I do x because y”
Viva is like an oral/speaking exam. Where sets of questions will be asked. And interpretation of questions + answering them is the problem. Any tip please.
No, I am not going to write about conjunctions any time soon ;).
– Ich esse Pizza, weil ich Hunger habe.
I don’t have any recommendations about this viva, because I’ve never done or taught it. But if you learn enough vocab you should be fine.
Hello Emanuel
I’ve a question which I’m not sure if it directly relates to “German Word-Ordering Category” or not. However, let me post it on here because I can’t find any other category which my question can belong to.
I tried to practice speak some sets of German sentences, for examples,
(I really apologize if the Grammar might be not that perfectly correct)
1.Ich esse heute zu Hause einen Apfel
(I am eating an apple at home today)
2.Ich gehe heute sehr schnell zur Schule.
(I am going to the school very fast today)
I’ve the problem while I am speaking this kind of sentences in German because their verbs and their most defining parts are separately put by less defining parts (even though I know the reason why they’re sepearated based on your lesson here)
In my brain (I am not sure if German people feel the same or not), verbs and their most defining parts are actually the mental images which are next to each other. Therefore, it’s not a problem for me when I speak these sentences in English because I just have to speak out the mental images which are actually next to each other in my brain. (I don’t even need to think of the mantal images of less-defining parts in my brain at this point because only the mental images of verbs and their most defining parts are enough for speaking. and this probably save my cognitive working memory)
In German language, however, I always make mistakes at speaking because I tend to speak verbs and their most defining parts (which are actually next to each other in my brain) together without separating with less defining parts
I really feel that it’s easier and probably uses less cognitive working memory for the brain when we can speak words which are really next to each other in the brain – my feeling)
Therefore, I am really curious how German people can speak and separate verbs and their most defining parts with less-defining parts in between even though their brains should feel that verbs and their most defining parts are actually mental images next to each other in their brains and should feel easier to speak out next to each other)
One assumption that I can think of is that German people might think of the images “verb”, “most-defining part” and “less-defining part” together before speaking out?
Because, by this way, “verb”, “most-defining part” and “less-defining part” can be related together in the brain before speaking out in the required German word-ordering even though the cognitive working memory might be more in this case in comparison with the case where only “verb” and “most-defining part” are required and create relation in the brain before speaking out.
I am really sorry that this question is quite long, but I really would like to know how German deals with this kind of sentence when speaking so that I can utilize the same way of brain-processing to improve my speaking skill (together with normal speaking practice as well)
Thank you so much in advance
That’s a tough question, and I’m not sure if I’m qualified to answer that as I don’t have any background in the science of speech creation and what goes on in the brain.
So take this as my best guess.
When you talk, I think, your brain first thinks in concepts rather than words.
– the big tree on the hill behind my house
This tree for example is a concept. You don’t puzzle together “a tree” and then specify it in your brain. It’s just one memory unit that you then describe.
Same for actions.
– missing the weekly zoom call because of Jiu Jitsu practice
That is a concept as well, or two concepts that are quickly connected as cause and effect.
Now, in our brains these concepts are kind of like a cloud, a still image including audio and smell and touch that you can “walk around in”.
That tree on the hill behind the house for instance – you can focus on different aspects of that concept mentally.
But when we verbalize them, we have to “linearize” them, so we have to pick all the information about the concept that we need and put it in words that come one after the other.
For that, our brain has sort of templates that it fills in.
For nouns for instance, in German and English, the template looks like this:
– [determiner(article] [specifications] [actual object]
– the big old oak tree.
In other languages, like in French for instance, it looks like this:
– [determiner] [actual object] [specifications]
In English this would be:
– the oak tree big and old
I believe that the brain fills in the template slots in parallel and then stores them in a sort of RAM memory while you say the words.
And the more used to a template you are, the quicker and easier.
Like… using the default English template for objects is much more effortless than using a different way.
– the big old oak tree
– the oak tree, big and old
Now, actions also have templates, just like nouns.
And in English the template looks like this:
– doing the dishes after lunch
– [verb] [specifications: high to low impact]
Note that this is REVERSE the noun template (head first vs head final)
German on the other hand uses essentially the same template it uses for nouns.
– nach dem Mittagessen den Abwasch machen
– [specifications low to high impact] [actual verb]
This feels natural for a German brain and since the template is filled from a concept in parallel, it’s only limited by working memory. Like… how many specifications can you store. And it’s not about how many words these specifications have but how many “concepts”
– doing the dishes quickly after lunch with a sponge and home made detergent despite the fatigue
Here, we have a bunch of specifications that are not connected and it becomes a memory game. I don’t think you could recall all of them right now.
But as long as it’s a reasonable amount of specifications, there’s no problem to keep it in working memory.
– nach dem Mittagessen mit selbstgemachtem Geschirrspülmittel den Abwasch machen
No problem.
But I digress.
So the natural order of things for actions is specifications first, from low to high impact and then the verb at the end.
That’s the template a German brain is used to.
And what’s special then is that we move a part of the verb to position 2. But that is a MODIFICATION of the normal template.
That’s the sentence template, basically, while the other thing is the template for the action.
– going to the store (describing an action, generic)
– I go to the store (using that action in a sentence)
– in den Supermarkt gehen (action template)
– Ich gehe in den Supermarkt (used in a sentence)
The internal order of the action has not changed. It’s still going left to right, we just plucked the verb out and put it in the beginning to fit the sentence template.
– ein Bier gekauft haben (action template past tense
– Ich habe ein Bier gekauft. (used in a sentence)
You can see that the order of the action template didn’t change, we just took out one part.
So… Germans do NOT do mental gymnastics. The brain just uses the natural templates and fills them. And you do know the template from English nouns, you’re just not used to it for verbs.
But it feels just as natural for us to say
– lange im Regen auf den Bus warten
as it feels for you to say
– the long awaited and highly anticipated book
Can you see what’s going on? The English phrase is actually LONGER than the German one, but it doesn’t feel that way.
So… you have to train your brain for this new pattern of ordering verbs. I think a good way is actually to not use them in a sentence but just write them down as concepts, like a to do list for example:
– den Abwasch machen
– mein Zimmer aufräumen
– unbedingt alle E-Mails beantworten
– Maria wegen der Party am Samstag fragen
This was quite long, but I hope it helps a bit :)
Thank you so much Emanuel for your suggestion. I will adopt it for my practice :)
Hello Emanuel.
I am practicing German language on Duolingo and have found these two sentences which have different word-ordering patterns even though they seem to have the similar verbs and most-defining word elements.
Regarding the word-ordering principle, I feel the 2nd sentence is correct but the first sentence seems strange because “zwei Kurse” is before “am Nachmittag” even though it’s the most-defining element to the verb “habe”. If you’d not mind, may I ask what might be the possible reason to make this word-ordering?
(is it possible that “am Nachmittag” modifies “zwei Kurse” instead of “habe”? or the sentence would like to focus “am Nachmittag” as the most interesting news (even though I feel it’s strange to do so on this sentence)?
Thank you so much for your help
Great question and observation!
– Ich habe zwei Kurse am Nachmittag.
Unless you then continue with other time slots, this is not really the default order, just like you said.
It “FEELS” pretty much like this new trend in German, where we put certain elements AFTER the final verb slot.
– Ich muss meine Mutter anrufen heute.
No one writes like that in a proper context, but people do talk like that all the time.
The “heute” is a bit like a coda, an after thought. And “am Nachmittag” feels exactly the same.
It’s not WRONG though… just colloquial/spoken.
Thank you so much Emanuel
Regarding the comment I left on the very first article about word order… I think I should have read all of this things before asking if people are supposed to always follow the time-manner-place-rule.. Great articles! I think this stuff is the real key for starting talking German and make even the most complex grammar rules easy to digest. Thanks!
Glad it works for you :)!
Not sure if it’s really helpful with talking on the fly, but it can help make sense of German structures and have a somewhat consistent predictable system… having something like that usually makes one feel safer and more secure, which is a good thing for speaking a foreign language.
I’m hoping head final will start to come more naturally…
How does it work with “Es kam bei dem Feuer niemand ums Leben.” Normally the ‘um’ would come at the end? Is it because the ‘das Leben’ is merely adding to the umkommen? (assuming I’ve parsed the sentence correctly…)
Ich wunsche dir viel Spaß im Norwegen….
Actually, you got the verb wrong. It is NOT “umkommen”.
The phrase is “ums Leben kommen”, similar logic to “Fußball spielen”. “ums Leben” is basically like a prefix for the “kommen”.
Does that help?
OK that makes a lot of sense – vielen Dank.
( secretly thinking MORE PREFIXES!! AARGH!!! …. :) )
Wow. This makes so much sense! Thank you so much for the unicorn wisdom, I think I understand german a little better now
Great it works for you :)!
Thank you for the posts. This clears out the major chaos stuck in my head for months… it hurts. Thanks for the unicorn magic even though it’s not perfect but so does Albus Dumbledore.
Glad it helped :)!!
Thank you so much for such a thorough explanation on this topic. I learned the usual rules of sentence structure and grew frustrated when I was met with so many exception. It’s starting to make so much more sense to me now and explain all the exception I’ve encountered.
Glad my approach works for you :). The “mainstream” version is fine to an extend, too, but it really just “treats” the symptoms, not the underlying condition.
Oh my goodness, this sure explains why I (a native English speaker) feels so backwards reading German. How will I ever get used to the Head-last order!
Maybe start with short phrases like
– I ate my pizza up.
I think at least in parts of the English speaking world, this is still idiomatic.
And, if you can get yourself to doing it, I’d say, take a novel and read it out loud to yourself. Slowly and properly. That way, you get to produce that “arc” yourself and you get used to it.
Hey Emanuel, another awesome post. Just a minor error i noticed, you should flip the order of the two “I was tired in the office” examples to match the order of the equivalent German examples above. Greetings from California!
So my german life was a lie. I always thought that the general order for stuff (no noun or verb) is unless one is in first place
Time, manner, place, akk obj, dative obj (unless pronoun), verb seperable part. I was like right. This.
I never knew you could swap them or that thier instances where it needs to be swapped or swapping may cause word order struggle. So to check I got the post.
The tension part still confuses me though, really do. The last few sentences with the Freunde and gf especially. The bread instead of a bread. Mabye part 3 holds all the keys ;)
Here is a test of my understanding, it will belong so bear with me
1) Ich esse Im Hause einen Apfel (normal sentence)
1a) ich esse einen Apfel im Hause ( Help tension ), 1b and 1c, 1d will save the day
1b) ich esse den Apfel im Haus
1c) Ich esse einen Apfel Im Hause,aber keine Kartoffel
1d) Ich esse Im Haus den Apfel ( You destroyed it again 1d)
1e – a question) With reference to eating, if included an element of time, would it be equally relevent to the loction and swapping their order wont change a thing or cause tension?
I dont know what “Zum Frühstück” would count as. Time?
2) Ich schlafe um 7 uhr auf einem Bauernhof (okay)
2a) Ich schlafe auf einem Bauernhof um 7 uhr (not okay)
2b) Ich schlafe auf dem Bauernhof um 7 uhr und nicht Im Haus. (okay)
2c)Ich schlafe auf dem Bauernhof um 7 uhr (okay)
2d) Ich schlafe um 7 uhr auf dem Bauernhof (not okay)
3) General notes and questions
3a) if there is a tension, the sentence is still correct but wierd?
3b) Look forward to an equell painfully long comment on part 3 ;)
This sentence is from your Sentence structure explained post. Did we chose me mir here first since it’s a personal pronoun?
Gestern hat mir Maria ein Buch gekauft.
Yes, that’s pretty much it.
“With reference to eating, if included an element of time, would it be equally relevent to the loction and swapping their order wont change a thing or cause tension?”
Time and place are on equal levels for “essen”, I think. But what happens if you swap depends on how the element looks like “in einem Haus” should come after “gestern” while “dort” should come before “in drei Tagen”.
It really depends on how exactly the sentence looks like.
“zum Frühstück” is interesting. It has a time vibe, but it’s actually more of an adverb. “why” or “for what purpose” are at the core of it.
All examples in the 2-series are okay. They just have slightly different focus on things.
3a) Yes, tension is a good thing. It just sounds wrong if there’s too much of it without justification.
3b) I do not ;)
I suppose the reseon that all sentences in 2-series are that both time and location are very relevant while 1-series has more tension since “What” is much more relevant to “Essen” than “where”
Dankeschön
Wunderbar explanation and examples. I came over from your 2019 advent calendar to read this. I find it amusing that rule-loving Germans do not have actual rules for word order. :)
Glad you like it :)!!
Hallo Emmanuel,
ich habe einige Fragen von meine Übungen, die ich noch nicht klar finde. Es sind die Lösungen :
1. Sie hat gestern ihre Tasche im Zug vergessen.
2. Er brachte mir den geliehenen Mantel ins Hotel.
3. Der Gast überreichte der Dame des Hauses einen Blumenstrauß an der Wohnungstür.
4. Die junge Frau gab ihrem Mann zum Abschied einen Kuss an der Autotür.
5. Die Versammelten verurteilen einstimmig den Einmarsch fremder Truppen in ein ünabhängiges Land.
6. Du hast mir diese Geschichte schon gestern in der Mensa erzählt.
Warum ist die Position von ‘Lokal’ immer am Ende und nach dem Akkusativ-Objekt?
Sind diese Übungen aus deinem Buch?
IN Beispiel 1, 2 ,5 ist der Ort die interessanteste/relevanteste Information. Deshalb ist sie hinten.
In 3 würde ich persönlich den Strauß ans Ende machen. So wie es ist, klingt es, als ob das irgendwie wichtig ist, dass es an der Tür war und nicht auf der Strasse.
Bei 6 ist der Ort nicht so spannend, aber die Geschichte ist schon etabliert, sie ist Teil der Szenerie. Neue Informationen sind “wann” und “wo”. Und da “gestern” nur ein Wort ist, ist es idiomatisch, dass der wo-Teil hinten steht.
Hilft das?
Ich denke mal, dass die Übung irgendwie wegen diesem Tekamolo-Quatsch so ist.
Nein, Meine Lehrerin hat mir das gegeben. Das verwirrt uns sehr. Sie hat uns TeKaMoLo unterrichtet, aber gleich danach hat sie diesen Übungen gegeben.
Wie kann man wissen, dass der Ort relevanteste Information In Beispiel 1 ist? Wenn ich “vergessen” sage, soll man “was” fragen, nicht “wo”.
Außerdem habe ich noch einige Fragen.
1. Wir mussten schon bald wegen eines Unfalls eine ganze Stunde lang im Stau stehen
-> Warum steht “eine ganze Stunde lang (wann)” nach “why”, aber “schon bald (wann)” steht gleich nach dem Verb? Beides ist “wann”, aber warum ist die Position anders?
2. Andere Autofahrer haben sich mit uns lang und breit über die Verkehrsverhältnisse während der Urlaubszeit unterhalten
-> Warum steht “wann” am Ende? Ich glaube, das ist nicht die interessanteste/relevanteste Information.
3. Wir haben unterwegs eine längere Pause wegen einer Reifenpanne machen müssen
-> Warum ist die Wortstelleung so? Kannst du mir bitte erzählen?
4. Wir haben in der letzten Minute allen unseren Freunde eine hübsche Karte von unserem Urlaubsort geschrieben
-> Warum steht “allen unseren Freunde” nach “wann”?
5. Wir haben uns unseren Urlaub genau so immer vorgestellt
-> Warum steht “immer” am Ende?
Vielen Dank!
Oh my, this Tekamolo-crap :).
So… how do you know that place is the most relevant in the first example? You do, when you look at the sentence as a whole. The information “where” is the main payload, all the rest is secondary or (and this is important) is already part of the conversation. It gets explained closer by “where”. Does that make sense?
Every single sentence is different and has a different purpose, that’s why Tekamolo fails so often.
Now, about the other questions:
1)
“schon bald” is “when?”
“eine Stunde” is “how long?”
The information about the duration is more interesting here than the one about when, that’s why it’s further on the right.
2.)
The time information at the end is actually not independent. It is part of the noun phrase “the traffic conditions during vacation”; it’s one unit. It DOESN’t talk about when the action of the sentence took place.
Oh… sorry, dass ich auf Englisch schreibe. Ich bin oft verwirrt, und vergesse, in welcher Sprache der Kommentar war :)
3) Was genau findest du komisch? Wie würdest du es anders stellen? Das erklär ich dir dann :)
4) Die Zeitinfo ist ziemlich uninteressant. Interessanter sind “wem” und “was”. Deshalb ist die Ordnung so. Wenn du “in letzter Minute” weiter hinter schiebst, dann kriegt das Fokus und man denkt das ist irgendwie relevant.
5) Ich würde es vor “genau so” stellen. aber dem Sprecher war es offenbar wichtig zu betonen dass es “immer” war.
Hilft das?
Sie hat gestern ihre Tasche im Zug vergessen.
I was reading this (the Beispel from the original sentence) and I cannot really understand why “Location” is more important here. When I hear the word “forget”. I would normally think of “what” first.
I think the reason is “im Zug”. Since if it was at home, it wouldn’t be as big of a deal?
I can understand the reasoning in Beispeil 2 (transfer of things therefore object first)
However, I got no clue on hint 5
Interesting question and you gave an interesting answer yourself.
In this example, both versions are possible:
– … im Zug ihre Tasche vergessen.
– … ihre Tasche im Zug vergessen.
If we have “Zug” last, I am tempted to read it out loud with an extra emphasis on Tasche, just to counter the “natural” focus on Zug.
You’re right that the location is somewhat relevant here.
I was thinking of
– Ich habe meinen Schlüssel zu Hause liegen lassen.
Here, the location feels even more relevant because you’re talking about “leaving behind”.
“vergessen” is very similar.
Emmanuel, I got super confused with the training in the park example because I thought that the (second/other) verb always came at the end and then we work backwards to put the most important element of the sentence before the verb. But this example is obviously an exception? Otherwise, I found it super useful to understand it based on how you explained the head last concept. Thanks!!
I can clear that up… “trainieren” is used as a noun here. “das Trainieren”. It has an article and it’s capitalized.
To put it in box-terms, it fills the “for what”-box.
Does that help?
Ah got it and yes it does! thank you!
Hi Emmanuel,
You lay down the general principle: “the more interesting, relevant and defining something is, the later it comes.”
So how does this apply to following?
(1) Schön ist es hier.
(2) Hier ist es schön.
Apparently (1) emphasizes more the pleasantness of the place, whereas (2) emphasizes the location of the place (as opposed to elsewhere). Based on your article, I thought it would be the converse?
Thanks :)
Great question!!
The crucial point is that my principle describes how you get the “default” structure. That is also the most bland structure, the one with the least emphasis.
Deviating from that structure is what creates special emphasis, so paradoxically, moving an element from its natural habitat at the end toward the front gives it the focus and “impact” you want it to have.
The example is like this:
– Hier ist es schön.
The verb is “sein” and the most defining element for that is “what” something is or “how” it is.
“hier” is part of the scenery, the listener already knows where you are, otherwise “hier” wouldn’t make sense. So this is nothing new and hence it’s natural place is somewhere near the beginning.
– Schön ist es hier.
Now we’ve moved “schön”, the information about “how” away from where we’d expect it and THAT gives it extra shine.
– Hier ist es schön. = It’s nice here.
– Schön ist es hier. = Wow, it’s really nice here.
For completion… in a context where the beauty of a location has been part of the conversation the sentence might actually get a special emphasis on “hier”. “Schön” is scenery then, and “hier” is the payload AND it’s outside of it’s usual slot in the beginning, so uber emphasis
– Schön ist es HIER = It’s nice HERE, not where you are.
Hope that helps. Let me know if you have follow up questions :)
Thank you, Sir!
Hi Emmanuel,
So I understand that moving “schön” to the beginning where it’s not its natural habitat creates a special emphasis. And I also understand that since “hier” is moved to the end of the sentence, it’s also more defined.
I am a bit slow here, sorry – which is emphasized in this sentence then? Does it mean that it entirely depends on the tone when speaking?
Thank you!
Both are emphasized but “schön” would get more oral emphasis than “hier”, because that is the initial “off-position”. The speaker chose to put “schön” first, not to put “hier” last. That was just a byproduct. And also, the “last” isn’t really that far away from the position 2.
– Schön ist es im Sommer hier.
That would have more tension for “hier” than if it just comes after “es”.
Hope that helps.
Okay! I get it now! Thank you so much for your explanation! :)
Glad I could help :)
Super, that’s fun. I’m currently studying B1.2 and trying to get my head around the very strange german sentence structure. I’ve been randomly organising sentences according to what sounded best to me, but haven’t had any kind of rule. I came across TEKAMOLO and so thought to find out about it as something potentially useful, and a Google search got me to this article. I’m delighted to hear that there are no rules though, as having them seems like a surefire way to take all the fun away. English and French are languages that you can play with and be creative, so I’m glad to hear that German is too. In England we advise to “learn the rules first and then break them”, so there’s definitely a place for ideas like TEKAMOLO. It’s just nice to know that they’re not set in stone. Thanks for the unicorn approach. It definitely makes sense to me.
Hilarious. I’m enjoying learning German word order. Never thought I’d say that.
Really glad to hear that :)