Conditional in German 2- The Real Conditional

Hello everyone,

and welcome to the second part of our look at what we  all love on hot summer days:

Air Conditional

Badum tish.
Conditional is that could, should, would-stuff that’s officially called Konjunktiv II or Subjunctive, but we’re using a different name because YOLO!
In part one, we learned that the core function of Conditional  is to shift a statement away from reality and that the different uses are a result of that. Then, we got like a little overview over Conditional in German and then we learned how to build what we called würde-conditional; one of the two versions of the non-past conditional.
If you haven’t read it you really should start with that because it’s the foundation and you’d be a little confused without it. So here’s the link

Conditional in German – 1 – The beginning

Today, we’ll take a detailed look at the other version of the non-past conditional:

The Real Conditional

So let’s jump right in.

The würde-conditional uses a helper verb (werden) to express the “conditional-ness”. The real conditional on the other hand is made by making certain modifications to the verb itself.
Let me walk you through it:

We start with the written past form, and sometimes we don’t have to do anything because the two forms are identical.
But a fair number of times we have to add like an umlaut or something. It depends. Oh and then, the conjugation is a little bit different. Kinda like a mix of present and past endings or something.

And that’s it. Let’s look at a few examples. I’ll give you the written past so you can compare:

  • kochen:
    Du kochtest. (You cooked)  – Du kochtest. (you’d cook)
  • schlafen: 
    Ich schlief.     (I slept)            – Ich schliefe.  (I’d sleep)
  • lesen:
    Sie las.    (She read.)                 – Sie läse.  (she would read.)

Now you’re probably screaming “Emanuel, this is super complicated and your explanation is AWFUL.”
And you’re right. It is awful.
But the thing… we don’t really need to deal with a complicated general “How to build it”-guide for the real conditional because we won’t be building the form for many verbs.
Take a look at the first example again –  kochen. The real conditional is EXACTLY the same as the written past. The difference between I cooked and I would cook is pretty big, though.  And we all know that the German likes precision, so it’s kind of natural that for all the verbs where the forms are identical, we use the würde-conditional.
But even if the real conditional is unique – either because of conjugation (see schlafen) or umlaut (see lesen) – even then that STILL doesn’t mean that they’re actually idiomatic in every day spoken German. On the contrary. Using the real conditional for schlafen and lesen sounds like a theater play.

There’s  only a really small group of verbs that use the real conditional in daily talk. Little more than a dozen.
And the best thing is… we already know them.
Because it’s the same group tends to use the written past in spoken German – helper verbs, modal verbs and the most basic, common every day verbs. I’ll give you a little overview with the full conjugation at the end, but let’s go over them together now.
because there are lots of little bits to say and they’re not all 100% real conditional. For some, both versions sound okay and for some, the choice actually depends on the context. Or the phrasing. Or the weather. Or what you’re having for lunch.
I think I’ll have pasta with Anchovies and fresh onions and olive oil. Yummy.
Anyway… uh… let’s start with the two classics haben and sein.

haben and sein

The written past stem for those is war and hatte and the real conditional just gets an umlaut – wäre and hätte.
Just to make sure though… technically, they do have a würde-conditional  and at least for haben, you might hear it.
It’s not the most elegant thing under the sun but hey, neither are sandals with socks and still people rock it from time to time.

  • Hättest du auch gerne weniger Bauchmuskeln?
    Würdest du auch gerne weniger Bauchmuskeln haben? …. sounds clumsy, idiomatic-factor: 3/10
  • Would you also like to have less abs?
  • Wenn ich mehr Zeit hätte, würde ich mehr Sport machen.
    Wenn ich mehr Zeit haben würde,  …. this sounds quite clumsy; idiomatic factor: 2/10
  • If I had more time, I would do more sports.
  • Wärst du sauer, wenn ich nicht mit in die Oper komme?
    Würdest du sauer sein, wenn…. quite clumsy, 2/10
  • Would you be mad if I don’t go to the opera?
  • Wenn das Wetter besser wäre, würde ich joggen gehen.
    Wenn das Wetter besser sein würde…  sounds pretty much wrong
  • If the weather was better, I’d go running.

These examples are also a great reminder that we shouldn’t compare. You see, English has two versions of the “conditional” as well (would be vs were and would have vs had). But the usage is different.
Next up, we have the modal verbs and we’ll start with können and müssen.

können and müssen

Just like haben and sein, the two form their real conditional by adding a nice, sexy umlaut to their past form – so konnte becomes könnte and musste becomes müsste. And especially for those two, you really really need to make extra effort with the pronunciation. To your ear, konnte and könnte probably don’t sound all that different. And objectively, they’re not. Like… if you were to look at a sound spectra of them, they’d look similar.
But the meanings are SUPER different, and so to the brain of a native speaker there is no “in between”. The brain will always make a decision and commit. And if the brain came to the conclusion it heard konnte, the notion that it could have been könnte is quite far away and that might lead to misunderstandings. So yeah…  if you find that people look at you with a blank face after you tried using könnte, you probably have to tweak your ö.
Anyway… examples. Again, I’ll keep giving you the würde-versions as well, so you can nerd out over the structure and compare but you won’t need it.

  • In order to be on time, we would have to leave in five minutes.
  • Um pünktlich zu sein, müssten wir in 5 Minuten losgehen.
    … , würden wir in 5 Minuten losgehen müssen….  meeeeeehhhhhh, idiomatic level: 3/10

  • I would do the dishes if I had to.
  • Ich würde abwaschen, wenn ich müsste.
    … wenn ich müssen würde meven more meeeeeehhhhhh; 1/10

  • Thomas could have less abs, if he weren’t working out so much.
  • Thomas könnte weniger Bauchmuskeln haben, wenn er nicht so viel trainieren würde.
    Thomas würde weniger Bauchmuskeln haben können,…. NOPE 0/10

  • Could you help me real quick?
  • Könntest du mir kurz helfen?
    Würdest du mir kurz helfen können?NOPE! 0/10

Apparently, the würde-conditional is especially unidiomatic for können, but there’s one exception. Of course :).
When you talk about that you’d like to be able to do something and you do that by using gern, then it’s the real-conditional that actually sounds wrong.

  • Ich würde gerne Klavier spielen können.
    Ich könnte gerne Klavier spielen…  not immediately understandable. 
  • I’d like to be able to play the  piano.

Cool. Next up, we ha… oh, hold on there’s a call…. erm… James from New Zealand, welcome to the show.
“Hey mate, may I ask a question real quick?”
Sure, go ahead.
“So this structure in the last sentence…. a modal verb, with a normal verb and würde… those confuse the hell out of me. Could you tell us how to build those?”
Oh, sure. Let me just put in a little headline real quick…

Structure interlude

So, I know that these structures are giving lots of people a hard time but they’re actually really simple. The basic system is you take the “old” verb and replace it with the “new” one and move the old one to the end – either in ge-form for spoken past and passive or in dictionary form for modals and conditional. Watch…

  • Ich spiele sehr gut Klavier.
  • Ich kann sehr gut Klavier spielen.
  • Ich würde sehr gut Klavier spielen können.

“Oh wow, that’s… quite clear actually.”
Yeah, the reason many learners are struggling with this is that they kind of panic. Like… they don’t use a system but instead just move verbs all over the place.
“Haha… yeah, that sounds like me. Hey, but how is it for these verb-at-the-end-sentences?”
Well, it’s the same idea… you just take whatever verb there is in position number two and move it to the end. Come on, give it a try…
“Nah man, you do it. I can’t do it with the colors.”

  • Ich habe gesagt, dass ich [ —-  ] sehr gut Klavier spielen können würde.

“Well wow… that is so logical now that I see it. Is it always like  that?”
Well, no… it’s a bit different for the past conditional but we’ll talk about that in detail next time.
“Cool, cheers mate. Bye.”
Cool. So now let’s get back to the verbs and the next pair is wollen and sollen.

sollen and wollen

And these two actually do NOT use an umlaut, so their written past and real conditional forms are actually identical – wollte is wanted and would want and sollte is was supposed to and should.  Now you might think like “Oh, okay so I guess we’re using würde-conditional here because German likes precision.”
But German also likes being a dick to learners and so sollen pretty much only uses the real conditional while the würde-version sounds so incredibly weird and alien, most people would call it wrong.

  • I should drink another beer.
  • Ich sollte noch ein Bier trinken.
    Ich würde noch ein Bier trinken sollen. ... NOPE!!

  • You shouldn’t do that.
  • Du solltest das nicht machen.
    Du würdest das nicht machen sollenagain, NOPE!!

So for sollen it’s actually all up to Captain Context.
For wollen on the other hand, the question which version is idiomatic actually depends on the phrasing.
Haha… yeah, I felt like I said “the phrasing” just now. That would be absolutely ridiculous tho… oh… oh no… it really does depend on the phrasing.

  • If I wanted to I would do it.
  • Wenn ich wollte, würde ich es machen.
    Wenn ich wollen würdewürde ich es machen… sounds meeeeehhhhh, but not unheard of.

  • You wouldn’t want it either, that someone drinks your beer.
  • Du würdest auch nicht wollen, dass jemand dein Bier trinkt.
    Du wolltest auch nicht, dass jemand dein Bier trinkt… (sounds like past tense… “You didn’t want…”)

I know, this must be a bit frustrating to read, but that’s the thing with choices that are based on “idiomatic-ness”.
Things aren’t always coherent.
The reason I am even mentioning all this is not so you get it right for each verb and every context. The goal is to make you aware that you can’t capture all this by a few rules and you just need to build some sprachgefühl over time. So please… don’t stress out about it.
Moving on to the last couple of modals. And those are a bit particular, as well.

dürfen and mögen

The forms are the classic – past stem with  umlaut. So durfte becomes dürfte and mochte becomes möchte.
What makes them special is that they modify their meaning a bit in the Conditional.
Dürfen itself means to have permission and every now and then you might find that sense used in conditional… the real conditional usually.

  • Ich würde in die Bar gehen, wenn man da rauchen dürfte.
    …, wenn man da rauchen dürfen würde. nope!
  • I would go to the bar, if “one were allowed to smoke there.”
    (I used a pretty literal translation here)

Anyway, what’s noteworthy about dürfen is that you’ll see its 
real conditionaldürfte, in contexts of making assumptions about reality…. where English would use should.

  • Das dürfte reichen.
  • That should be enough.

But we’ve actually talked about dürfen in detail in a separate article, so I’ll add the link below.
Now, dürfen apparently takes a bit of liberty with its meaning in conditional, but it doesn’t go as far as möchten.
Because that one has kind of become a verb of its own.
Technically, yes… möchten means would like. But it’s only used to express actual wanting, only in a more polite way and in fact, it doesn’t really feel like a conditional to a native speaker anymore.

  • Maria möchte einen Wäschekorb aus Bambus kaufen.
  • Maria wants/would like to buy a laundry basket out of bamboo.
  • Möchtest du noch ein Bier?
  • Do you want/Would you like another beer?

And it does NOT have the same meaning as the würde-version, which is about would like in a more literal sense…. you don’t like it now, but you would if it were different.

  • Der Song ist gut, aber ich würde ihn ohne die Gitarren mehr mögen.
  • The song is good but I’d like it better without the guitars.

And here, möchten would sound absolutely weird.
Now I’d really like to have a good transition to the next part… but I don’t.
So… moving on.

All the rest

Besides the modal verbs and the helper verbs, there’s a bunch of basic everyday verbs that also tend to use their real conditional form in spoken German. It’s the same ones that tend to use their written past form in spoken German… wissen, gehen, sehen, geben, nehmen, kommen, liegen and finden and a few others… it depends a bit on  the speaker.  Actually,  most of them use both versions in daily and there is a general trend:

For  literal sense of the verb, the würde-conditional is probably the more idiomatic choice.
The real conditional is usually used with figurative, metaphorical meanings of the verb.
(And that actually also hold for the prefix versions of the verbs, to an extent. )

Let’s take finden as an example…

  • “Ich finde gelb ist die perfekte Farbe für die Küche.”
    “Ich fände pink besser.” (more elegant)
    “Ich würde pink besser finden.”
  • “I find/think yellow is the perfect color for the kitchen.”
    “I’d like pink better.”

  • Maria hat so eine schlecht Orientierung, dass sie ohne GPS nicht mal den Weg zum Klo finden würde. (more common)
    …, …  Weg zum Klo fände.
  • Maria has such a bad sense of direction, that she wouldn’t even find the way to the toilet without a GPS.

The first one uses finden in an abstract sense of opinion and here, the real conditional sounds better, in the second one it’s the literal finden and the würde-version is the better choice. But it’s not super strict, so the other versions sounds okay, as well. In fact, in a question both sound equally fine.

  • Ähhh…. Schatz, wie  fändest du es, wenn wir morgen in die Oper gehen?
    … wie würdest du es finden, wenn ….
  • Uhmm… honey, how would you like it, if we were to go to the opera tomorrow?

And for the verb wissen it really doesn’t matter… both versions sound okay and people use either one.

  • I would like to know when you’re going to come.
  • Ich würde gerne wissen, wann du kommst.
    Ich wüsste gerne, wann du kommst.
    (equally idiomatic)

It really depends on the verb. So now we could go over them one by one and see for each one when and how idiomatic which version is.
Or we could just look at a few examples and then chill.
And we’ll do the latter :). Because let’s be honest… no one is going to remember that anyway. Yes, you might take notes, yes, you might even try to study it, but it won’t work. These idiomatic things will come over time. Just know about the general trend I told you, be aware that it’s really just that – a TREND – not a rule. And then lean back and let it learn you, instead of learning it.
Wow, that made no sense :).
But yeah… here are some examples for the verbs in action. I’ll put the more idiomatic version first.

  • “Kommst du zu meiner Party?”
    “Ich würde kommen, wenn Thomas nicht kommt.”
    “Ich käme, wenn Thomas nicht kommt.” … sounds a bit theatrical
  • “Are you going to come to my party?”
    “I would come, if Thomas is not coming.”

  • “Ich bin verwirrt. Mein Chef hat mir von alleine mehr Geld angeboten.”
    “Echt?! Das käme mir auch komisch vor.”
    “Echt?! Das würde mir auch komisch vorkommen.”… less elegant, but works, too
  • “I’m confused. My boss offered me a raise out of his own initiative.”
    “Really?! That would seem odd/fishy to me as well.”

  • Wenn ich dich nach deiner Nummer fragen würde, würdest du sie mir geben?
    …. deiner Nummer fragen würde, gäbest du sie mir? … sounds Romeo and Juliet-ish
  • If I asked you for your number, would you give it to me?
  • Es wäre so schön, wenn es im Park einen Bierspender gäbe.
    …., wenn es im Park einen Bierspender geben würde.
  • It would be nice if there was a beer dispenser in the park.
  • “Meinst du ich kann heimlich ein kleines Stück von Marias Kuchen essen?”
    “Nee, das würde sie sehen.”
    “Nee, das sähe sie…. sounds quite posh
  • “Do you think I can secretly eat a small slice of Maria’s cake?”
    “Nah, she would see it.”

  • “Wie findest du mein neues Regal?”
    “Schick, aber es sähe besser aus, wenn es nicht so voll wäre.”
    “Schick aber es würde beser aussehen, … “
  • “How do you like my new shelf?”
    “Nice, but it would look better if it weren’t so full. ”

  • “Kannst du mir morgen beim Umzug helfen?”
    “Hmmm… morgen hab ich echt viel zu tun. Vormittags ginge vielleicht.” (sounds slightly better)
    “…, vormittags würde vielleicht gehen.”
  • “Could you help me moving my things to the new apartment tomorrow?”
    “Hmmm… I have a lot to do tomorrow. In the morning might be okay/work”

And this is where we’ll stop. Yes, right now.
I know this is anti climactic, I know you might feel a bit dissatisfied, a bit left hanging but trust me… that’s on purpose ;).
Seriously. It’s gonna make you wonder, ask questions, pay attention. And next time, when we’ll do a HUUUUUGE exercise about what we’ve learned so far, you’ll be surprised how well you do and how “at home” you feel in the Conditional.
As promised, here’s a little overview over all the verbs …

Real Conditional Verbs – Overview (pdf)

And as always, if you have any questions about any of this so far, just leave me a comment.
I hope you liked it and see you next time.

Further reading:

4.7 18 votes
Article Rating

Newsletter for free?!

Sign up to my epic newsletter and get notified whenever I post something new :)
(roughly once per week)

No Spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Your Thoughts and Questions

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3 months ago

Maybe this is a dopey question but, does the “würde” conditional always use würde as the helper verb?

This question came up in my mind today because I’ve been trying to learn which verbs use “sein” when creating the past tense e.g. “ich bin nach Hause gefahren”. Would I say “ich würde nach Hause fahren” or do these weird verbs also have weird conditionals?

3 months ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Sorry I didn’t explain myself very well, but you somehow answered my question anyway.

So to check: “ich würde nach Hause fahren, aber/wenn…” is basically “I would drive home (now/tonight/tomorrow/etc, but/if *insert condition here*)” and no matter which verb it is you would use “würde” when using this type of conditional format? I.e. no verbs require some weird alternative to “würde”

3 months ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Thanks! :D

3 months ago

Wow! Amazing article. Thank you, Emanuel. You are just perfect.

3 months ago

I realise the article is quite old so maybe you already know this, but just in case:

In the example sentence, “Maria has such a bad orientation, that she wouldn’t even find the way to the toilet without a GPS.” a better translation for “orientation” would be “sense of direction”.

A person’s “orientation” can refer to the physical direction they’re facing, or more commonly is used figuratively to refer to their sexual orientation. It wouldn’t normally be used to mean a person’s skill at finding their way.

As always, thank you for the great article!

3 months ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Apologies, I meant it’s “an article of a certain age” ;)

8 months ago

Hey Emanuel , thanks for the Great blog , can you check please if this sentence is totally correct ( In order to be on time, we would have to leave in five minutes.) I think it can be ( In order to be on time, we would have left in five minutes.)

Can you please tell me if it is correct? I mean my sentence!

1 month ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Hey you! To be on time, we need to leave in 5 minutes!

3 months ago
Reply to  Emanuel

These two sentences are written using different forms of the conditional (there are 4 types of conditional in English)

“In order to be on time, we would have to leave in 5 minutes.”

Is a form which talks about future uncertainty, so at the moment of speaking, you have not yet left.

“In order to be on time, we would have left in 5 minutes.”

This is a form which is only used to talk about past events which did not happen. So, you would use this if you have already left the house, but you did not manage to leave within the 5 minute window in order to be on time.

Emanuel is right, it needs an explanation for why you didn’t leave in 5 minutes. Because you’re talking about the past, the listener will be expecting more to the story. It sounds unfinished without the explanation.

Something like “We would have left in 5 minutes but we couldn’t find the keys.” The “in order to be on time” part feels a little clumsy added on to it but is not incorrect :)

It’s a little confusing because the word “have” has multiple uses. Maybe it would be clearer if we switch out “have” for “need”. So…

“In order to be on time, we would need to leave in 5 mins.”

“We would have left in 5 minutes, but we couldn’t find the keys.”

In the first sentence, “need to leave” and “have to leave” are fairly interchangeable. In the second sentence, the word “have” is used to form the conditional itself. If we wanted to include the other “have/need”, it would become, “We would have needed to have left in 5 minutes…” Or “we would have had to have left in 5 minutes…”

I hope that makes sense!

9 months ago

I read this article thinking I got everything and then in the was für article there was this sentence.

  • “Auf was für einen Film hättest du denn Bock? Eine Adam Sandler Komödie? Oder eher was lustiges?”

what’s the point of Real Conditional here? What kind of film would you have Bock for? Is it an exaggeration or is the speaker being dramatic?

1 year ago

In the “opera” examples, why do the subordinate clauses use “komme” and “gehen” instead of their conditional forms? Is it because the hypothetical events are in the future? Does one just use the present tense in cases like these?

1 year ago

Great articles! They really cleared up the subject for me.

These examples are also a great reminder that we shouldn’t compare. You see, English has two versions of the “conditional” as well (would be vs were and would have vs had). But the usage is different.

I wouldn’t say were and had are conditional. I think they are really leftovers from an English subjunctive. Interestingly though, American English uses a double conditional construction sometimes: “If you’d leave now, you’d get there.” Maybe a German influence?

If you were to use a double conditional in Spanish (“si te irías ahora, llegarías”) you’d sound like you missed a year or so of schooling. You definitely need a subjunctive clause to introduce the condition.

1 year ago

Hello Emanuel! Thanks for the great article.
I am a little confused about one of your examples:

“Ich würde kommen, wenn Thomas nicht kommt.”

Does it work this way too, as written below?:

“Ich würde kommen, wenn Thomas nicht kommen würde.”

Because I feel like his coming or not coming is also unclear and conditional.


2 years ago

(And that actually also hold for the prefix versions of the verbs, to an extend. )


(let me know if you do not want corrections, and I will stop :) )

2 years ago

Also the first “and” should be “an”

But a fair number of times we have to add like and umlaut or something. It depends. Oh and then, the conjugation is a little bit different. Kinda like a mix of present and past endings or something.

2 years ago

Minor typo: repeated word “modifications”
“The würde-conditional uses a helper verb (werden) to express the “conditional-ness”. The real conditional on the other hand is made by making certain modifications to the verb itself modifications.”

2 years ago

Hey Emmanuel, thank your for setting up such a great website for German learner! It really helps me a lot. I just have a question about the usage of “sofern” in the real contional case, especially its difference form the usage of “wenn”. It seems to me “sofern” could subsitude “wenn” in Lot of cases and does not need to deal with the conjugation of ” haben” and “sein”. For example, ” Sofern das Wetter schön ist, machen wir morgen einen Ausflug. ” And ” Wenn das Wetter schön wäre, würde wir morgen einen Ausflug machen. ” Could you tell me what’s the differnece between them? Thx!

Stefano Carreno
Stefano Carreno
2 years ago

Thanks for the post, but now I have a doubt…. If I want to say “I should help you”, do I have to use “Ich soll” oder “Ich sollte”. Is there a difference between both??? Thanks in advance :)

Stefano Carreno
Stefano Carreno
2 years ago
Reply to  Emanuel

I thought that in the present tense “sollen” translated to “should”, so watching that it had apparently the same meaning in conditional form got me confused.

2 years ago

“Sollen” is usually translated as “shall” but I think it gets a lot more use than “shall”, which is basically redundant in 2nd and 3rd person.

3 years ago

Hallo Leute!!

Thank you very much Emanuel and all the German learners of this blog, who gave me the opportunity to be Member for a whole year …for free. Thanks to your generosity I will be able to learn German and makes concrete plan for the future of my family…hopefully moving one day in Germany. May the Universe will bring this good deed back in your life and in your families:))


Novella Bacelli
3 years ago

Hallo Emanuel,

könntest du erklären welche Regeln befolgt werden sollen um die Abfolge der Zeiten zu beachten?

Auf Italienisch (und auf Latein) gelten andere Regeln, z.B.:
Die Satz “Er fand das gut, wenn man nicht wusste, wo er steckt „ darf auf Italienisch auch so übergesetzt werden :

“Er fand das gut, dass man nicht wüsste (Konjunktiv auf Italienisch) , wo er stecken würde„ (Trovava che fosse bene che non si sapesse).

Die Satz “Ich würde gern wissen, wann du kommst„ darf auf Italienisch auch so übergesetzt werden:
“Ich würde gern wissen (aber Konditional auf Italienisch), wann du kämest (aber Konditional auf Italienisch) „ (Vorrei sapere quando verresti):

Vielen Dank. Ich mag sehr, wie du uns zum Lachen bringst, wann du Deutsch erklärst.

4 years ago

Hallo Leute, I am Khang, I just want to say thanks to all people that have contributed to this site, so that people like me, who cant pay for the membership still have an opportunity to learn. You are kind-hearted and care for others people, I really appreciate for all your deed. Emmanuel and your team too, you are really rock !

Alan Prado
Alan Prado
4 years ago

Hallo Emmanuel. I am Alan. your most recent member ( I think). This is my second post I’ve read today and so far I’m loving it. Thank you so much for your attention and also I’m extremely thankful to everyone that made this possible, I love you all guys so much! and Keep on learning german !

Vitor de Almeida
Vitor de Almeida
4 years ago

Wow! I have only compliments to say! That was a completely awesome and funny explanation. You have no idea how it opened my head! Thanks a lot and keep doing this great writing please!!!

4 years ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Just to jump on this, I think it’s best to think of “sollen” as meaning “be supposed to” (AE; I vaguely think BE speakers would say “meant to”?) rather than associating it with “should.”

It’s a cognate of “shall,” but the meaning of that one has shifted and/or disappeared in modern English. It works in the second or third person:

– You shall [or “thou shalt”!] have another beer.
– He shall have another beer.

This is definitely a command. However:

– I shall have another beer.

This just means “I will,” “I’m going to,” “I intend/mean to.” AE speakers wouldn’t use this, generally; not sure if it’s still in common use in BE.

4 years ago
Reply to  berlingrabers

“not sure if it’s still in common use in BE.”

I think it’s uncommon to say “I shall [do something]”, but it is colloquial to form polite questions using “shall”

Shall I do the dishes?
~= I’m going to do the dishes, but I’d rather not, so I’m giving you a chance to object :)

[at a social event]
Shall we go soon?
~= Let’s leave

Is it weird to use “sollen” in this way in German?

4 years ago
Reply to  Emanuel

Danke für deine Antwort! Also “soll” klingt mehr wie eine Pflicht/eine Empfehlung und “sollte” passt mehr zu “wenn…” Sätzen?

Ich habe gerade auf Google gesucht und es scheint, dass “should” auch diese zwei Bedeutungen hat. Ich finde es aber noch schwierig den Unterschied zu erkennen – vielleicht, weil ich es vorher einfach nie überlegt habe oder vielleicht, weil die Konjugation auf Englisch sich nicht ändert, deshalb ist es nicht so klar, dass das Wort eigentlich zwei unterschiedliche Funktionen haben kann!