Hello everyone,
and welcome back to your weekly fix of German – the good, strong stuff.
And today, I actually got a nice little dose of grammar for you, because we’ll take a look at:
Movement Verbs without ‘zu’
Here’s an example for what I mean:
- Ich gehe in den Park Yoga machen.
- I go to the park to do Yoga.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
Such examples are very common in daily life and the question learners usually ask is “Are you really doing Yoga?!”
And I’m like “Bro, of course not. It’s just an example.”
And the second question people ask themselves is why there isn’t at least a zu in there.
- Ich gehe in den Park Yoga zu machen… why wrong?!
And it’s a good question because the rule (book 3, chapter 47, rule 77 b II, section 12.1) says that, just like in English, only modal verbs connect their second verb directly, while the rest needs to or in German, zu or um zu.
- Ich kann schlafen.
- I can sleep.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
- Ich versuche zu schlafen.
- I‘m trying to sleep.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
So what gives, with the yoga example? Gehen isn’t a modal verb and yet there’s no zu. Is that just the inevitable exception to the rule?
And the answer is of course yes. Technically, it is an exception.
But it’s not a glitchy phrasing that just happened to be idiomatic.
There’s actually a system there.
“zu” or no “zu” – The Question Word Matters
Take these two sentences:
- Thomas goes to the bar.
- Thomas quickly goes after work, because he is thirsty.
The second one, on the surface, should have more value, because we get three pieces of information about the going: the why and the how AND the when. And yet, it sounds odd and incomplete, while the first one, even though it only contains one piece of information, feels good and rounded.
And the reason is that the first one contains the “most interesting” or “most defining” piece of information for to go – the “where?”.
And for to go the connection is pretty strong, so if we don’t have this bit of info, at least implicitly, the sentence feels weird.
Now, if you’ve read my article on “zu” and “um zu” (link below), you might remember that the zu-element generally gives an answer to “what?”.
- “WAS versuchst du?”
“Ich versuche zu schlafen.” - “WHAT are you trying to do?”
“I’m trying to sleep.” - Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
And now based on what we’ve just learned… is a zu-element the first choice to give information about gehen?
The answer is of course no!
Because the verb gehen strongly needs a “where”, while a zu-element gives us a “what?”. In fact, a what-element doesn’t really match up with gehen at all. You can simply try it in English by actually making a question:
- What are you going?
That’s not a proper question!
It would work fine with where and when and how and why and with whom and many other questions… but asking what makes no sense.
So you see that a zu-element is not only not the first choice… it’s actually not really a choice at all.
Now let’s take the example from the beginning again.
- Ich gehe in den Park Yoga machen.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
We now know why a zu would be wrong here and that it’s actually a quite fundamental reason, not just some random “Yeah, because languages are weird”-thing.
But that’s only half the story. I mean, the where? in that example is the park. So what function does the Yoga machen have?
Seeing Verbs as Locations
Well, doing yoga is the REASON for my going to the park – the purpose or the why.
So it would actually be a candidate for an um-zu-construction because those generally give us a purpose, a why.
- Ich gehe in den Park, um Yoga zu machen.
- [who] goes [where] [for what/why]
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
And that is a perfectly fine, idiomatic construction.
But it also sounds a tiny little bit stiff.
Instead, what happens is that German tends to use the activity, the verb directly as a sort of pseudo-where.
- Ich gehe [in den Park] Yoga machen.
If we do say the park bit, then the activity is just kind of an add on, but we can actually leave it out. Then, the Yoga machen gives us the where? that’s so important for the verb gehen.
An activity as a location… sounds weird but it actually also works in English:
- “Wo gehst du hin?”
“Yoga machen.” - “Where are you going?”
“Doing Yoga.”
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
And it doesn’t only work for to go.
- “Where were you last night?!”
“Uh… Doing Yoga. Acro-Yoga….”
When Maria asks Thomas where he was, she wouldn’t be satisfied if he just shared a location pin in Google maps, because what she REALLY wants to know is what he did.
You see, talking about our whereabouts in terms of what we did makes perfect sense.
English tends to use its -ing-forms for that purpose and in German… well, THAT’S what the Wit-no-Zouz phrasings are for – those phrasings that make you wonder why is there no zu or um zu :)
- Ich gehe einkaufen.
- I’m going shopping/doing groceries.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
- Ich bin ein paar Bier trinken gegangen.
- I went to have a couple of beers.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
- Ich finde es beeindruckend, dass Maria viermal in der Woche trainieren geht.
- I find it impressive that Maria goes to the gym four times a week.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
- Ich war gestern im Park laufen.
- I was for a run at the park yesterday.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
- Ich komme dich besuchen.
- I’ll come visit you.
- Practice pronunciation – click once to start recording and again to stop
Phrasings like these are incredibly common in German, primarily with the verbs gehen and sein but you can also find them for kommen and fahren.
And I hope you could see that it’s not just a random grammar glitch or colloquial laziness, but that it actually makes a lot of sense that they DON’T have zu.
Of course you can also think of the whole thing as “just” an exception, but I’d really recommend thinking about it as a distinct category…. verbs used as the where?.
Either way, I hope I could shed some light on the matter and also give you some little insights into the inner workings of language.
As always, if you want to check how much you remember, you can take the little quizz I have prepared for you. And of course, if you have any questions about this just leave me a comment.
I hope you liked it and see you next time.
Further reading:
Audio Speed
Dark Mode
hi minor error in your quiz –
“So “Ich gehe shoppen.” is correct band “Ich gehe zu shoppen.” is not. ”
I’m assuming “band” should be “but” here
Fixed, thanks a lot!
I don’t understand why is it okay to say “ich bin shoppen”?
I understand “Ich gehe shoppen” because shoppen here would act as the pseudo-location as you called it, but I don’t understand it’s use with bin.
You can see it the same way:
– Ich bin [hier, da, zu Hause, shoppen].
All these words can basically express where you are.
Does that help?
Yes, when you placed it next to the other ones it was easier to understand. Thank you
In your series on the conditional, we learned that if you have two verbs connected to the past tense, they are supposed to both be in infinitive form, e.g., “I would have needed to go” = “Ich hätte gehen müssen,” NOT “Ich hätte gehen gemüsst.” But now we have:
Ich bin ein paar Bier trinken gegangen.
I’m guessing this is because “ein paar Bier trinken” is an object in the sentence?
You could see it that way, but then that would clash with:
– Ich hätte ein Bier trinken müssen.
The key is that the infinitive version involves a modal verb. Not sure if I mentioned that in the article.
So it’s because “gehen” isn’t a modal verb?
Yes.
Thanks for the great explanation! It’s always so much more interesting when a feature is explained a core aspect of the language and not just a weird exception :)
This made me realise that Hindi is actually a little similar to German in this regard. When expressing the idea of doing something to do something else, you normally have to make the verb an infinitive and add the postposition के लिए (ke liye), which has a basic meaning of “for”. However, with verbs of motion, you can get away with putting the infinitive in the oblique case, just like other destinations of motion.
For example:
मैं अपने घर जा रहा हूँ।
(main apne ghar jaa raha hoon)
I my.OBL house.OBL going am
“I’m going to my house”
मैं योगा करने जा रहा हूँ।
(main yoga karne jaa raha hoon)
I yoga to.do.OBL going am
“I’m going to do yoga”
Just like German, there’s the idea of the verb being “where” the action is.
Wow, thanks for this, it was really interesting to read and yes, it’s the EXACT same underlying perception of reality, just expressed in different grammars.
wow this is super interesting. how how how did i not know this?
When you mentioned modal verbs it immediately reminded me of some of the issues around using brauchen with zu and how although brauchen isn’t officially a modal verb kind of gets used in ways that can be like the use of modal verbs. Of course this is different but there seems to be some kind of weird similarity.
I’m a bit confused.
You can use zu as a preposition for people occasions or activities, but here we are saying we don’t use zu with gehen, fahren etc.
Doesn’t that contradict? Why wouldn’t it be ‘ich gehe zum einkaufen’ because einkaufen is an activity?
Good question.
What I mean by “activities” in the quote is a verb made into a noun.
Your sentence totally works, but it is “Einkaufen” – hence “zum Einkaufen”.
Here, we’re talking about connecting verbs, which is a different area of use.
So yes, if you look at it from the angle of meaning, it’s kind of a contradiction, but from a grammar lens, it’s two different battle fields.
Hope that helps!
Thanks for the reply. That makes sense. :-)
Maaaan, that’s gold. The constructs like “Ich war spazieren” have puzzled me a lot. No one could tell me what was going on there. Thanks a lot!
Glad I could help!
You seem not to pronounce the ‘en’ on gegangen. is this on purpose or my sound system?
John
That’s how it sounds in normal everyday German. I do a slightly longer ending a bit like “ngngng”, but it’s easy to miss for non native speakers.
I wish all teachers would explain the way you do!!!! I learn more with you than in any of my class!!!!
Thanks a lot, ich freue mich :)
That’s a really helpful way of looking at when to drop the “zu”.
Just a few comments on the English translations.
“Wo gehst du hin?” “Yoga machen.” In English would be “Where are you going?” “To do Yoga”.
And in English it might sound a bit like there’s a “zu” there but you could understand it as part of the infinitive. You can’t actually say “I’m going doing Yoga” in English, it has to be “I’m going to do Yoga”.
“I’m going shopping” is fine. “I’m going to get/buy groceries works” but “doing groceries” is using the wrong form of the wrong verb.
It is “I went for a run at the park yesterday” (not “I was for a run yesterday”)
A really useful article, thank you!
Well, I don’t think Emanuel ever implied that “I’m going doing Yoga” was an option (unless the article was edited before I read it). I think the short response of “Doing yoga” works well enough, as it’s short for “I’m doing yoga”, exactly the sort of non-literal answer to “where are you going?” that Emanuel was talking about, albeit sounding a little curt or dismissive, perhaps the way a teenager would answer their mother as they walk out the door.
Your alternative of “To do Yoga” definitely works, but the fuller response of “I’m going to do Yoga” is actually kinda funny, because it’s unclear if “going” is the literal motion, or simply a future-tense construction (z.B., the “going” in “I’m going to be late”). The fact that we have both uses of “going” produces fun phrases like “I’m going to go” lol, or even better: “I’m going to be going soon”.
Which brings up the colloquialism of “gonna” for “going to”, which can ONLY substitute the temporal/future “going”, not the physical action:
Wrong: “I’m gonna the store”
Right: “I’m gonna GO to the store”.
But “gonna do Yoga” is also a plausible answer to “where are you going?”. So answers with both the physical “going” and the future-tense “going” are possible.
The other things you flagged were all valid corrections.
Wait, “I’m gonna do Yoga” could be understood in the sense of “travelling” to a place to do it? That’s new for me, actually, I’ll have to pay attention to that :).
Just recently, someone commented that “gonna” makes them cringe really hard and I should absolutely not use it, so that’s another battle English language is gonna have to fight out over the next decade :).
Southern person here: embrace the “gonna”. It is a slurred ‘going-to’ and is spoken in all states below Mason Dixon. Be not ashamed. Someone called you (Emanuel) out for the ending of gegangen or another ngng ending. It is exactly the same — except it has now become the spelling for the pronunciation. Etwas became was. I don’t write gonna, but to not SAY it is really speech police. I’m gonna say it, and so should you…
I finna use it then :)!
sdf
“I was for a run at the park yesterday.”
doesn’t really sound right in English, I think these are better:
“I ran in the park yesterday”
“I went running in the park yesterday”
“I went for a run in the park yesterday”
I have always thought that these cases were exceptions and that I just needed to accept and memorize. But it really makes sense when we think about it as a proper category. Du bist der Hammer, Emanuel! Thank you so much, I have already taken notes.
Super, freut mich, dass es hilft :)!
hallo leute, Ich bin Lender und Ich bin 21 jahre alt, Ich komme aus Venezuela aber Ich wohne im moment in Chile mit meine Familie. I reached out the creator of this wonderful website through mail a couple of days ago and explained my situation about why I wasn’t able to purchase a subscription. This guy, without hesitation, gave me a one-year subscription and suggested thanking those people who have paid more in other to give other people the opportunity to learn this wonderful language for free. I want to thank all those amazing human beings for giving me such a great opportunity, I taught myself English so If I make any mistake while typing this, I’m so sorry, I’m still enhancing my skills at writing wish you all the best and never give up learning :)
Great job with the English! One suggestion:
who have paid more in other to give other people… / who have paid extra (more works but extra sounds better to my ears) in order to give other people…
That was excellent English. Good job.
Great post. Thank you. If you are looking for a more detailed explanation on the wider topic, you might want to check out my post on the topic https://www.olesentuition.co.uk/single-post/with-zu-or-without-infinitive-clauses-and-modal-verbs-in-german
Hallo Emmanuel,
Thankyou for sponsoring me in. Its really a wonderful intiative. One day i will surely make it up to you and your team. Nocheinmal Danke schöne.
Wieder ein perfekter Artikel von Emanuel.
By the way thanks a lot who paid a little extra for the others and Emanuel. I did not see these type of team spirit even people in the language course or even university who I know face to face.
Vielen Dank
Liebe Grüße Utku
In the Quiz, you write that “lernen” must connect with “zu”, but here they show an example without “zu”:
https://www.sekada.de/korrespondenz/rechtschreibung/artikel/mit-oder-ohne-zu-so-wenden-sie-die-verben-helfen-und-lernen-richtig-an/
Dang it, that was an unlucky example on my part. Yes, “lernen” CAN take a second verb directly.
I was searching in my head for a verb that looks simple, is known by everyone and doesn’t have a prefix and I totally didn’t realize that “lernen” works both ways. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for pointing that out. I changed it to “planen” now.
Thanks! This is extremely helpful to me because I’ve been puzzled by these expressions in German for a long time.
These zu exception words. Would it be fair to say that they are also the words that take “bin” rather than “habe” in the past perfect tense? As in ich bin angekommen
Yes, because they’re about you moving from one location to another. But there are WAY more “bin”-words than there are words for which this zu-less construction works.