Hello everyone,
and a very warm welcome to our German Word of the Day. Why very warm you ask? Because, I like you all so much… and because it is SUMMER, it’s warm outside and I had the waitress put ice cubes in my beer… Yes… I do that. I am that kind of person. I totally water down the oh so tasty German beer just for the sake of freshness… and now to take a first sip….
….ahhhhhhhhh….
….sooooo refreshing. Seriously… you should try it some time.
So… it looks like it’s going to be a great article today, and it’d better be because we are going to look at the meaning of:
einstellen
Now some of you may be asking themselves why they should read stuff of a guy who wastes his introduction for pointless banter and who openly admits that he is drinking alcohol while writing.
To those of you I say: fair enough. Go ahead and use a dictionary … here is einstellen at Pons.de and here at Leo.org… … …
So… everybody back? Great. Let’s start then.
The core of einstellen
Einstellen is one of those verbs that seem to have a million meanings. But it is not so bad after all… wait till we talk about anstellen. That one is a real monster.
Einstellen can be boiled down to 2 main concepts and with a little mind bending even down to one. To get to this kernel of einstellen, let’s first look at the parts. The word consists of the prefix ein and the basic verb stellen. Ein when together with a verb usually carries the idea (and only the idea) of in(to)… .so it has nothing to do with the ein as in a. Other example with ein would be einschlafen (to fall asleep) or einfallen, which was already a Word of the Day here.
The basic verb stellen … well … in German there are basically 2 main ways to position stuff – stellen and legen. Stuff can be anything from solid physical object to entirely abstract things like … hmmm … uhm … an imaginary chair. Legen is to position something in a horizontal or at least comfortable, “low energy” position… a lot of times it translates to to lay… but not all the time of course. Stellen on the other hand is to position something in an upright or tense position… sort of… this is not the catch all explanation but the best I have. So for example I stelle my glass on the table. I could also legen it on the table but then the (still refreshingly cold) beer would damage my laptop. Other things you stellen in German are questions and an alarm.
- Darf ich dir eine Frage stellen?
- May I ask you a question?
- Ich muss mir einen Wecker stellen.
- I have to set an alarm.
In these examples, nothing is literally put in an upright position but you could justify the use of stellen by saying that there is some kind of some tension in both these cases. The question seeks an answer and the alarm will go off with a lot of noise. Legen would be way to cozy here… I hope you can follow me so far . So… Possible translations for stellen are to put, to set and to pose.
Based on these 2 parts, einstellen should mean something with the idea of to put into something. And all we have to do now, is to see what we can do with this :). Piece of cake.
Meanings of “einstellen”
The first and most important meaning of einstellen is best described (not translated) by the word to adjust… . Let’s look at this in real live.
- Thomas stellt seine Klimaanlage ein.
- Thomas adjusts/configurates/stets up his airconditioning.
- Maria stellt einen neuen Radiosender ein.
- Maria tunes in a new radio station. (lit.)
- Kannst du mir meinen Computer so einstellen, dass er nicht immer automatisch Updates runterlädt, sobald ich online bin.
- Could you set up my computer such that it won’t automatically download updates whenever I am online.
Whenever you adjust something so that it is “in tune” with something after, what you do in German is einstellen.
Interestingly, this can be also used for people.
- Stell dich daraufein, dass es morgen regnet.
- Attune yourself to that, that it will rain tomorrow. (lit.)
- Prepare yourself that it will rain tomorrow.
- Ach du bist ja schon da??? Ich war jetzt darauf eingestellt dich erst NACH dem Essen zu sehen.
- Oh you are here already??? I was thinking that I meet you AFTER diner.
- Um sich auf das Meeting einzustellen, hat Maria alle Akten gelesen.
- In order to prepare for the meeting, Maria has read all the files.
So if you einstellen yourself, you set your mind in a certain way. What is important to realize is that you need to say what you tune, so in this case you must say yourself. Otherwise it could be very well your alarm, that you set. Saying the myself, himself, etc make it clear… oh as we talk grammar already let’s not forget the preposition you need: auf… just like ich warte auf, you stellst dich ein auf…
This einstellen is used quite a lot, but what’s even more important is the corresponding noun… die Einstellung. If you are talking about a technical device, die Einstellungen are the settings. Check with your cell phone for example. But also people have Einstellungen. Germans are like really complicated machines here… (oh the stereotype)… we have a LOT of Einstellungen… Einstellungen about a certain question, Einstellungen towards other people but also general Einstellungen about life.
- Du bist immer pessimistisch. Das ist die falsche Einstellung.
- You are always pessimistic. That is the wrong mind set.
- Meine Einstellung gegenüber Vegetariern hat sich geändert.
- My attitude towards vegetarians has changed.
- Thomas hat eine merkwürdige politische Einstellung.
- Thomas has a weird political opinion/view.
- Du musst deine Einstellung ändern, wenn du Erfolg haben willst.
- You have to change your attitude, if you want to get a job.
As you can see, there is not really one translation for Einstellung… attitude is quite close I would say, but still it doesn’t feel quite right in some situations. Think of Einstellung as the setting of something or someone and learn this word… it is used a lot in German.
So to wrap this up some sentence that our chancellor Merkel has been saying for a while…
- Wir müssen uns auf eine längere Krise einstellen.
- We have to be ready for a long crisis.
God, did you feel that too? … this sudden whiff of bore… must have been this example with politics… well, that won’t happen again anytime soon. Now let’s look at the next meaning of einstellen but first I need to get me a new beer…
The next meaning of einstellen has a very limited range. It is simply to employ… At first it might feel like it has nothing to do with the first meaning of einstellen but remember: the very core of the word, the main idea was to put into… if you employ someone you sort of put him or her into your company… or on your payroll if you will.
- Meine Unternehmen läuft super. Ich werde 3 neue Leute einstellen.
- My business is going great. I am going to employ 3 new people.
There really isn’t much to say here except maybe this: another possible translation for to employ is anstellen, but I don’t want to talk about the differences here because… you know… that whiff of bore from earlier was kind of intense. Imagine that as a tornado.
The third meaning of einstellen again feels like it has nothing to do with the one before… it is kind of like to show up.
- Die ersten Gäste haben sich gegen um 8 eingestellt.
- The first guest showed up around 8.
Now to show up doesn’t REALLY nail it, as this einstellen has a slow edge to itself… guests “trickle in” one by one. So if you just get to the train station, einstellen wouldn’t really fit.
And does it fit the core of einstellen? Yes it does. Why? Because, showing up someplace means to “put your body” there…
This einstellen however is not that much used… so as long as you understand it, it’s enough.
So.. now we have already reached the meaning of einstellen that is REALLY out there… and this meaning is… to stop. Damn.
Einstellen can mean to stop but it is a very special part of to stop only. First of all, einstellen is NOT the stop of stopping a moving object. You cannot einstellen a car or a thieve. Think of einstellen as to cease or to knock of. You can only einstellen activities. But is there a difference between einstellen and aufhören (read up on aufhören here)?
Difference between einstellen and aufhören
Well there sure is and it sort of lies in the grammar. Aufhören goes very well with verbs so most of the time it is used in a zu-construction. Einstellen on the other hand goes along with things /nouns. It is not so easy to illustrate that in English but we’ll try nevertheless.
- I stop smoking.
Now what is smoking here? A dress of course…. badum tish…
Is it a verb or a noun based off of a verb? As far as I am concerned the answer is not important because it depends on the perspective. It will become obvious what I mean once we look at the German translations.
- Ich höre auf, zu rauchen.
- Ich stelle das Rauchen ein.
Both mean the same pretty much but in the first sentence we have rauchen as a verb while in the second it is a noun or a thing – the action of smoking. It is not possible to exchange aufhören and einstellen without altering the rest.
- Ich stelle ein, zu rauchen.
- Ich höre das Rauchen auf.
Both these sentences are wrong. So einstellen and aufhören have the same idea, but they differ in construction. You can ONLY einstellen things… nothing else. So you have to make your verb a thing first. This makes a sentence with einstellen pretty stiff in comparison to a phrase with aufhören. Why… because the latter has 2 verbs, and verbs make the language feel alive.
Aufhören is BY FAR the more used. Einstellen is actually really limited to certain situations. One of them you might have heard on a plane.
- Bitte stellen Sie das Rauchen ein.
- Please refrain from smoking/stop smoking.
They could very well also say:
- Bitte hören sie auf, zu rauchen.
Why do they use einstellen? Well… during all that welcome speech on the plane they tell you to fasten your seatbelt, put your seat in an upright position, shut of electronic devices and so forth… so basically they tell you to do things with stuff. A phrasing using zu with 2 verbs, like aufhören would be, would totally stick out there and ruin the flow. And einstellen sounds a bit more official I guess.
2 other prominent examples with einstellen are these:
- Feuer einstellen!
- Cease fire!
- Die Serie wurde nach einer Staffel eingestellt.
- The show was canceled after one season.
Especially the first one is really stupid. If you are not aware of the meaning there is absolutely NO reason why you wouldn’t think that it actually means start fire or adjust fire or set fire.
Anyway…bottom line: einstellen as to stop is really not very useful in every day life. It is enough to know that it can mean that.
But does this meaning of einstellen actually match the core we had? Remember… to put into… Well if you are REALLY open minded it does.
See… first of you have to think of to keep as from of foresighted from of putting… if you don’t put something out (which is to keep), you don’t have to put it back in. So to keep is equal to to put back and to put back is a special form of to put into, which was our core. So… now when you cease fire,you keep the bullets IN your gun. When you cancel a show, you keep it IN your network or the writers minds. If you stop smoking, you keep the nicotine IN the cigarette, and the cigarette IN the pack… and yet you are tense so stellen is totally adequate there… and tadah… there you go. Einstellen as to stop totally fits the core meaning… and I see we have a call here, Matthiew from New York, hi Matthiew, how are you doing:
“Hey Emanuel… look … I like your show a lot and so far this one was quite
interesting too although there weren’t as many jokes as usual BUT…. this last
thing you said was ABSOLUTELY RETARDED!”
Uhm… uh… what do you mean?
“Oh please… this whole explanation why einstellen as to stop is the same like
einstellen as to set… Do you seriously believe this nonsense… I mean come on!… ‘you’re keeping the smokes in the pack blah blah blah’… what the
hell were you thinking… are you drunk?”
Uhm… well a little bit, but that has nothing to do w…
“Dude, do you even realize what bullshit you just dumped on air… ‘keeping
something is a foresighted form of putting it back’… for Christ’s sake … you really
have to cut back on the beer man. People trust you and believe the stuff you say
here.”
Uhm … uh.. well uhm…
“No man… I am really disappointed in you… I think your Einstellung (attitude/mind set)
is totally wrong and if you go on like that the interNet-work will einstellen(stop/cancel)
your show sooner than you can einstellen (prepare/ adjust/set) yourself for it.”
Look Matthiew, I … uhm…
“No man… don’t say nothing… listen to this again, when you’re sober… for
shame Emanuel, for shame!!… (hangs up)”
Wow… I don’t really know what to say. See that’s what happens when you are live… ok… so… what now?… uhm… yeah… the grammar… einstellen is a separable verb and builds its past with haben.
- Ich habe mich auf Regen eingestellt.
To prevent confusion I need to say this: when you einstellen in the sense of your personal settings you often use it as an adjective… you say that you ARE prepared for something. This is done with sein….
- Ich bin von Kopf bis Fuß auf Liebe eingestellt.
- I am prepared for love from head to foot.
It does look an awful lot like past but if a lady says that to you, it is present… very present… and to end this article with schmaltz, here is the famous Marlene Dietrich… enjoy
If you have questions or suggestions, just leave me a comment and I promise you, I will only moderately consume beer from now on :)
Hope you liked it and see you next time.
Thanks. My favourite entries are the ones where you explain the difference between different words with similar meanings, just as you have done here with einstellen and aufhoeren.
At the moment I am still struggling with the words deutlich, eindeutig and klar.
hey are you still struggling with those words?
well maybe it could help other people here.
My name is Marco I am from Berlin and native german speaker (lol)
deutlich ist soemthing you are very sure about something it’s obviously .
eindeutig is something you and everybody is very sure about soemthing that you can’t proove the opostie.
klar is just clear.
Cool danke :)
oh crazy German language….. Thanks for try explain it!
Great I really like the way u have explain the difference einstellen and aufhören .I have seen a lot but u have explain it in very easy terms.
so “aüfhoren” takes a zu infinitive and “einstellen” takes a noun. Fine, but instead of
“Ich stelle das Rauchen ein”
could we not say instead “Ich höre mit dem Rauchen auf”?
What is the difference then between “aufhören mit etwas” and “einstellen etwas”, or they simply interchangeable?
good question… I left that out as the post was already quite long and I was hoping for someone to bring that up…
so yeah… “aufhören mit dem” Verb and “das Verb einstellen” are interchangeable… technically … “einstellen” is not really used ever except for the examples I gave and some other occasions.
You can check on Linguee.com… most of it will be the other “einstellens”.
So “aufhören mit dem” is definitely the better choice.
As for the difference between “aufhören zu” and “aufhören mit dem” … I don’t really know… I think the “zu”-construction is more used as it is more dynamic.
One thing… “mit dem Rauchen aufhören” means to stop smoking … as in to quit it. “Das Rauchen einstellen” really means the action of smoking one zigarette. But that difference doesn’t always apply.
So bottom line:
aufhören zu … ok
aufhören mit dem … ok
das … einstellen … you don’t really need it ever.
hope that helped a bit :)
ps…. check out linguee.com if you don’t know it yet.
On second thought there are 2 more things that are important… first:
the reason why “einstellen” as to stop isn’t used that much is probably the fact that “einstellen”s other meaning is very widespread so there is room for confusion as soon as you leave fixed expressions that everyone knows.
Second:
“aufhören mit dem” does come handy when you need to avoid a double zu-construction… those are not good German. Sometimes I start a sentence and I realize too late, that I will wind up with a double zu… that always feels so ugly :)
The premium example is again: to smoke.
Ich versuche aufzuhören zu rauchen.
That is technically correct but not nice at all.
Ich versuche, mit dem Rauchen aufzuhören.
solves the issue. This advice is generally correct. Avoid double zu if possible (it is when one verb can be expressed as noun)
Ich versuche anzufangen zu trainieren.
Ich versuche mit dem Training/Trainieren anzufangen.
The second is better.
And then, I feel like “einstellen” is something you just do. It is nothing you really try. There is nothing to try. You are fully capable of “einstellen” and action (as in to stop). “aufhören” in the opposite is something you can try as the smoking example clearly shows.
Oh and one more thing.
Try to stop thinking about that.
This one in German:
Versuch, das Denken daran einzustellen.
Versuch, aufzuhören, daran zu denken.
Versuch mit dem daran Denken aufzuhören.
All these are not nice. The first one for reasons already explained. The second and third for the combination of the “nounified” verb Denken plus the prepositional object dara. Both are not really things but more abstract grammatical constructs. having them this close together sounds really stiff. So this is something to avoid too. In the last example even the order (Denken daran or daran Denken) is not 100% clear.
So there it would be better to replace to stop by “not (anymore)” altogether.
Versuch, nicht mehr daran zu denken.
Or
Du musst aufhören, daran zu denken.
Both these sentences are nice German and have no double zu or double artificial noun clusters.
Sorry if that was a bit elaborate but I really love to talk about writing style :)
Small nitpicking: there certainly is a semantic difference between “Versuch, nicht mehr daran zu denken.” and “Du musst aufhören, daran zu denken.”. The former is a suggestion, the latter tends to lean against an expression of order or instruction, and is therefore much stronger than what was probably intended as good advice.
May I suggest that in lieu of “Du musst aufhören, daran zu denken.” one uses “Du solltest aufhören, daran zu denken.”, to capture a more accurate meaning. A middle ground may be found using the short form of “Denk’ nicht mehr daran”. Then again, the intended meaning largely depends on the previous context of the situation, the propinquity of the individuals involved and the purpose of the advice or ad hoc exchange of this information (we don’t know if it’s a cynical comment, for example).
Hmmm… you’re definitely right in that there is a semantical difference between the 2 versions and I also agree that the version with “du musst…” sounds much more urgent. However, at least to me, the version with “solltest” is not less order like. The reason is that “müssen” can be due to a necessity of reality… reality is a certain way, you can’t change it so you need/have to … “sollen” on the other hand implies that someone told you to do whatever you have to do, so it is more an order than “müssen”. “Müssen” is stating facts, “sollen” is giving orders. Also, “sollen” also implies consequences if you don’t do as you’re told. The conjunctive 2 softens that a little but still to me there is a notion of “or else…”. Of course, as you said, context and inflection can make that disappear. My whole point is that it is probably better to stay away from sollen unless one is super sure about how it sounds.
As for a middle ground what came to my mind was “Es wäre am besten, wenn du aufhörst, daran zu denken.” or shorter “Es wäre am besten, nicht mehr daran zu denken.” or even shorter
Am besten nicht mehr dran denken.
This grammar is actually used fairly often of people want to give helpful advice. Other options are
Einfach nicht hingucken.
Tief einatmen (at the doctor)
Anyway… thanks for taking the time and writing the comment and I hope it wasn’t cynical :)
Thank you for your interesting and constructive feedback, which sparked the necessary incentives to spend a good half an hour pondering about the two words “sollen” and “müssen”. Often we believe that we know something that we’ve studied a long time ago, only to realize that one’s memory sometimes does not serve that well. I have checked the following resources to get a grip on which ideology I’d be inclined on following: http://www.canoo.net/services/OnlineGrammar/Wort/Verb/VollHilfModal/sollen.html http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/sollen Listed are some cases where “sollen” and “müssen” can be used interchangeably. It should though be noted that the negation of both can not be used interchangeably. The given examples offer valuable insight: Du sollst nicht töten. = Du hast den Auftrag, nicht zu töten. = Du darfst nicht töten. Du musst nicht töten. = Du hast nicht den Auftrag, zu töten. = Du brauchst nicht zu töten. Since this seems to be a forum where – well, guessing anyway – foreigners studying German get introduced to some of the intricacies of this fascinating language, the perceived level of difference and the nuances that can be expressed by choosing either one of them is arguably of secondary nature. Unless one starts contemplating about Kant’s (and presumably yours as well) interpretation of “sollen” and “müssen”, thou shalt not fear about being wrong. Back when I read Kant, I remember distinctly having had major issues understanding his observations in “Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten”, simply stemming from his seemingly equipollency of those two words; naturally amongst other linguistic and metaphysical challenges. On a more digressing note, the fallacies of his principle of “sollen impliziert können” indicate his kind of “blindness” towards an empistemic difference, as seen for example in the certainly not interchangeable exemplary phrase: “Denn, da sie [die reine Vernunft] gebietet, daß solche [Handlungen nach sittlicher Vorschrift] geschehen sollen, so müssen sie auch geschehen können.” – Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A807 / B835. For I am probably the last person with sufficient intellectual capabilities to criticise one of the greatest thinkers of all times, I should like to refer to a interesting essay written in English dealing with the potential fallacies of the Kant’ian use of “müssen” und “sollen”: http://www.philosophy.uconn.edu/department/wheeler/kant.pdf Coming back to earth, I would argue that all this has moderate to severe implications in science, law and philosophy, where the exact meaning of both words have to be defined clearly and unmistakably. Last but not least, depending on the psychological condition of the receiving individual, it will invariably make a huge difference in how you choose the wording. To a person suffering from let’s say borderline, you’d probably always better off using “sollen” than “müssen”, since the former implies, at least theoretically in the mind of the person with this emotional challenge, a possibility to evade or have the option of not being “forced” (in the sense of impossibilium nulla obligatio est) to comply with the order, without feeling cornered by the way the person interprets the sentence in question. Having said this,… Read more »
Wow, thanks for this interesting comment (which I had to read twice) :). I didn’t know that the implications of sollen and müssen were subject for Kant to discuss. I have to admit that I never read Kant. I had to try in university once but I failed. It is just too difficult for me at that point. Anyway, I don’t use “sollen” that much in daily life. Mainly at work, when I report to my co-workers what my boss has decided we shall or mustn’t do. In the negative (wir sollen nicht) I use it to indicate that I find the rule somewhat pointless. If I concur or if it is something serious I would probably be inclined to use (wir dürfen nicht). I had a student once who told me a bit about his philosophy and that he never uses the words “shall” and “should” or sollen respectively. He was of the opinion that how we talk determines how we think and he didn’t like the concept of “sollen”. When you mentioned the one commandment I realized that “sollen” gives it a very special and urgent tone. “Du darfst nicht töten.” would be pretty much the same (from an average Joe perspective, not philosophically maybe :) but with “sollen” is has much more weight. And also, I realized that I find the German version to have more weight than the English version. Now, German is my native language and I am not bilingual, so this is purely subjective, but to me “shall” sounds a bit kingly… “Thou shall entertain me and thou shalt not kill”. To me, shall just has a bit of a snobby aristocratic vibe to it whilst “sollen” is a common mans word. Kids use sollen. “Mama hat gesagt, du sollst dein Zimmer aufräumen.” That wouldn’t really work in English. “Mom said you shall clean your room.” So yeah… bottom line.. this is quite fascinating and I might end up in the library searching for books on the matter :). And I’ll try to read the essay you suggested. Now back to German: Es wäre am besten, wenn du aufhören würdest , daran zu denken. This doesn’t sound very nice. I think the grammar is fine, although I don’t know all the rules about when and when not to use conditional… to be frank I don’t care and since no one in Germany cares about the rules, if they exist, they are obsolete anyway. So… it doesn’t sound good, because you have a small verb cluster “aufhören würdest”. Now, a verb cluster alone is not a bad thing but it is if you ca avoid it. The würden-conditional is a fairly new invention that came up because people couldn’t tell the difference between the preterit and the conditional 2 for many verbs. And German has a tenancy from synthetic to analytic when it comes to verbs. Anyway, we don’t actually need a second indication of conditional here. Es wäre am besten… This tells us that… Read more »
PS Fantastic article!
Are any of you familiar with using the word “Einstellen” as a way that Bruno Groening (spiritual healer from Germany) to position oneself to tune in to the Heilstrom (healing stream) from the Divine/God? That is why I am looking at this site…to learn what exactly the word “einstellen” means. Thank you so much for you explanation and for the laughs; you are funny. If anyone wants to learn about Bruno Groening, I highly suggest this website: http://www.help-and-healing-sessions.com to learn about him. Many thousands have been healed even since his death in 1959 just by doing einstellen and following his teachings. I hope this information can help someone. It is good to know just in case you know someone who needs a healing. Thanks again for the lesson. Joanne
Yes, Joanne, I also looked at this page because of Bruno Groning.
Perhaps this is too late but English has a similar construction to einstellen.
It is set to rain this afternoon.
I am all set for the rain/bad weather.
It is all set /setup/in place for Tuesday.
I agree with you about the use of shall. Fifty odd years ago, a teacher used to ask: “Shall you do …..?” She was heavily involved in amateur dramatics and I though the question, it was usually rhetorical, was rather affected then and I have never heard anyone use it since.
I really appreciate your column, it is fascinating, thank you so much.
I am off now to read about aufhören because I would like to know the link between hearing, belonging and stopping.
Nah… never too late for some additions or questions :). That’s a good thing about a language blog… things don’t really age that fast. Thanks for the nice feedback and have fun looking around.
Excellent article and very interesting comments !
Ist es wie immer möglich, dass Du aufklärst, wie “ein” plus “stellen” “to adjust” bedeuten? Eine von Deinen tollen Geschichten möchte ich :)
Think of “adjusting” as small scale change of settings. Und “einstellen” kann “to set” heißen.
Hilft das?
Du hast Recht, aber ich habe etwas anderes gemeint. Ich wollte kennen, wie die erste Bedeutung (to adjust) die Hauptbedeutng (to put into) betrifft.
ich glaube, ich verstehe die Frage nicht so gut. Kannst du auf Englisch fragen?
Kleine Korrektur:
“ich wollte wissen” (nicht “kennen”)
Sure. At first, you said that the core meaning of einstellen is “to put into sth” and then you started to go in details. The first meaning of einstellen is “to adjust”. Now my question is that how the first meaning is related to the core meaning. Let’s put it this way, I want an explanation similar to one that you gave for the last meaning of einstellen (to stop). Saying that stop is some kind of putting sth back, you explained the relation between the last meaning and the core meaning, but you didn’t do the same for the first meaning.
Hope I could say what I wanted to! :)
I have read the article about the difference between kennen and wissen but I’ve forgotten which is which :D I should read it again and take some notes.
Woooooow, great article! Things are a lot clearer now and I feel like new doors have opened in my understanding of the language :D Einstellen is a pretty cool dude! Thanks a lot for the explanations and for your website, great great resource! x
Thank you for the awesome feedback :)!! Glad to hear it’s so helpful!
Hi Emanuel :
Ich suche deine Worteliste, wann Ich ein neues Worte austreffen. Kanst du bitte reinstellen erklaren?
Vielen Dank
Grüße
Vish
Oh ja, stimmt. Der Artikel ist schon alt, und damals hatte ich noch nicht an die r-Versionen gedacht.
Hast du schon ein paar “Prefix Verbs Explained”- Artikel gelesen? Vielleicht hast du ja eine Idee für “reinstellen” und ich sage dir ob du recht hast ;)
A similar usage in English to einstellen in the meaning of to stop is “stow it in”. Admittedly “stow it in” is rare and informal but it shares with einstellen the core concept of stopping by leaving/putting something in place…
Oh, that’s great :). Common or not, these little parallels can be really helpful (for native speakers, anyway)
I commented earlier that “stow it in” is conceptually similar to the “stop” meaning of einstellen…”pack it in” would be an equivalent on the UK side of the Atlantic…
Can I just use that for anything? Like… my roommate is smoking in the kitchen, could I be like “Pack it in, mate!”?