Hello everyone,
I’m back from my little Easter break and I think it’s high time for a bit of grammar again for a change.
And today, we’ll finally do the fifth part of the our series
German Passive Voice
At this point in the series, you already know what passive is, how to spot it and how to use the German werden-passive, which I also like to call… the passive.
And in the last part, we looked at some quirks of English passive that don’t really work in German.
Today, we’ll do the same for German and explore the so called Passiv-Ersatzformen, which are forms that express “a passive” while not really technically being one. And we’ll also find out about one really really weird use of the actual German passive that’ll make you go like:
“I’m not sure if I needed to know this, but thanks!”
This… uh… this is actually extreme excitement, just expressed the German way.
You know, us Germans, we never emote more than one standard deviation away from baseline.
Anyways, if you’re ready, let’s jump right in.
Find out more
All lessons, tools and premium features (and there’s a LOT of them :).
Already a member?
Audio Speed
Dark Mode
Are there guidelines or a rule of thumb about when something is -bar vs -lich or vice versa? Or is learning the correct ending for each word these could apply to the only way? For example, unerträglich vs. unerträgbar vs. unerträgabel or lesbar vs. lesable vs. leslich.
Nah, not really a guide and sometimes both are possible with slight variations:
– lesbar, leserlich
I think in terms of making up a new one, -bar is the better choice and you’ll be understood. “unertragbar” is not something people say, but they’ll immediately get it, but “esslich” makes no sense and no one would understand you meant “essbar”. So maybe just pick up the lich-ones and make up the rest :)
“Hier wird gearbeitet.”
Could you technically remove the “hier” in this sentence, or do you absolutely need some kind of complement to fill the first position in a subject-less passive sentence? If you can remove it, would the sentence become “Gearbeitet wird.”?
P.S. the link to this lesson in the general Grammar section is wrong, it leads to part 4 instead of part 5.
It needs to be filled.
If you take out “hier”, you’d swap in a dummy “es” just to fill it.
– Es wird gearbeitet.
Putting the ge-form first also works
– Gearbeitet wird.
This is grammatically correct, but it sounds truncated and weird and it’s hard for me to imagine a context where someone would chose to phrase it that way.
“ich lasse mir morgen die Haare geschnitten” makes sense to me as a concept, because if I don’t want to or can’t specify who is cutting my hair then I need this form, i.e. “I’m having my hair cut tomorrow.” If I said, “I’m cutting my hair tomorrow.” then it implies I’m going to cut it myself at home. But it gets weird for me when we add who is doing the action. “I’m getting my hair cut tomorrow by Maria.” is so unnecessarily clunky – I would always just say, “Maria is cutting my hair tomorrow.” or maybe “I’m getting Maria to cut my hair tomorrow.” but in that second version the emphasis is more on the fact I’m getting Maria to do it and less on what is actually being done.
Oh interesting. The German version doesn’t feel clunky at all, and phrasing it in active with Maria as the subject of course works, but it makes it sound like I’m talking about what MARIA is doing tomorrow, and not what I am doing with my hair.
Quick correction: Ich lasse mir die Haare SCHNEIDEN (not geschnitten)
Upsi i think my brain wants to put a participle there because it’s trying to do German words with English grammar. But once i start building more passive voice into my daily spoken German I’m hoping I’ll stop making that mistake.
Definitely worth working on. Mixing up participle and infinitive in either direction is among the more confusing mistakes you can make that can get in the way of being understood.
A huge thank you to the generous members of this amazing community who made it possible for me to get access to the site! Your support means a lot, and I’m truly grateful to be part of such a thoughtful and encouraging learning environment. Looking forward to diving into the resources and making the most of this opportunity. Vielen Dank!
Servus, Emmanuel!
In the article, you mentioned this is not Passiv-Ersatz:
“Das ist schwer zu verstehen.”
However, in the quiz, this is said to be Passiv-Ersatz (last question):
“Die Schrift ist schwer zu lesen.”
What makes one PE and the other not?
Wow, good catch!!
That’s what happens when I do the quiz after the article was already finished for a while and I forgot the nuances and clearly, I can’t even tell myself what’s a Passiv-Ersatzform and what isn’t without looking it up. That’s a great sign for a concept that’s too vague.
I took out that answer option.
The above is extremely useful, one reason being that, I believe, “Passiv-Ersatzformen” would be used very much in daily spoken German. It’s my hypothesis.
Some of them, yes. But not because they’re “replacing” a passive voice. They’re used because they’re nice ways to be generic about something.
Hallo! For the past year (at least), I’ve been getting the ‘you’ve reached your limit’ notice when trying to access the posts. I try to copy-paste the link, I try waiting until the next month, I try to click the picture…I keep getting blocked. Honestly, I don’t read religiously, but I do try to take a few minutes every once in a while to read about a topic that I find interesting or I need extra help with, and I find your content both interesting and entertaining. I hope you can help me. Thanks for anything you can suggest!
Did you try clearing your cookies for my site? Or a different browser?
Am I the only one here that pays the subs not to learn German but to read Emanuel’s jokes?
I do know that some people pay DESPITE the jokes, so this is some much needed balance :)
I felt justified when I read your comment!
In examples such as “Hier wird gearbeitet.”, isn’t “es” formally implied? Thus, formally, “Es wird hier gearbeitet.”
Did you mention somewhere in your passive voice series, the “man” form used commonly on signs? For example, – “Man spricht hier deutsch.” = German is spoken here.
So, in principle at least, instead of “Das Problem kann gelöst werden.”, these variations are possible:
– Das Problem lässt sich lösen.
– Das Problem ist zu lösen.
– Das Problem ist lösbar.
– Man kann das Problem lösen.
Finally, here’s one from left field: “Fortsetzung folgt” = to be continued
” isn’t “es” formally implied?”
No, absolutely not. It’s tempting to think so but the opposite is the case.
The “es” that you see in your version is JUST a placeholder to fill position 1 because the speaker decided to move EVERYTHING after the verb in position 2. And it has nothing to do with passive voice.
– Hier wird lange gearbeitet.
– Lange wird hier gearbeitet.
– Gearbeitet wird hier lange.
– Es wird hier lange gerarbeitet.
– Thomas trinkt heute ein Bier.
– Ein Bier trinkt Thomas heute.
– Heute trinkt Thomas ein Bier.
– Es trinkt heute Thomas ein Bier.
The second group is not passive voice and you can do the exact same thing.
If the “es” were to functionally belong to the sentence, you’d be able to move it elsewhere but you cannot.
– Hier wird es lange gearbeitet.
This makes NO sense. Because “es” is not an element of the sentence, it’s just position 1 filler.
“Did you mention somewhere in your passive voice series, the “man” form used commonly on signs?”
I don’t think I said that, but I’m not 100% sure :)
About the different variants of the problem solving example, I want to note that “Das Problem ist zu lösen.” can also be read as “The problem is to be solved.” … so like a command of sorts. Context would need to make it clear.
re: Fortsetzung folg.
This is just active voice in German ;). Yes, you could rephrase that as “Wird fortgesetzt.” but many things can be rephrased into passive voice. That’s why the concept of Passiv-Ersatzform is so arbitrary (at least in my opinion).
Hope that helps :)
“Fortsetzung folgt” is indeed active in German but translated to a form of future passive in English(?). The interesting thing is that the problem solving examples are all in German active voice but best translated (I think) to English passive.
BTW I think we might use passive (or pseudo) in English more than some commentators here might admit.
Eg “So what do you reckon? Can it be fixed?” = Is it fixable? (pseudo passive)
Eg “How bad was the storm? – Well most of the homes were destroyed and streets flooded.” (real passive)
Eg “Who left the gate unlocked? Don’t worry, it’s always left unlocked.” (fake passive? passive-like, adjectival)
in German(?)…
. „Was meinst du? Kann man das reparieren?“ = Ist es reparierbar? (pseudo passive)
. „Wie schlimm war der Sturm? – Nun, die meisten Häuser wurden zerstört und die Straßen überflutet.“ (passive)
. „Wer hat das Tor unverschlossen gelassen? Keine Sorge, es bleibt immer unverschlossen.“ (active)
I find this topic very interesting with all its nuances but ultimately another one that should come naturally and effortlessly to learners with time and Sprachgefühl.
Fact is, the passive voice in German is normally used much more frequently than in English. English might substitute either the proverbial “dummy” subject, e.g. “We” or “People”, for example, “People speak German here”, “We speak German here..” etc.
There are exceptions of course: “‘Wird gemacht!” = Will do!.
Wow…1 out of 5 correct. I need to re-read the lesson.
The kriegen/bekommen construction reminds me of the development of the spoken past. Do you think the process was similar?
Ich habe eine gelieferte Couch -> ich habe eine Couch geliefert.
Ich bekomme eine gelieferte Couch -> ich bekomme eine Couch geliefert.
Oh, amazing observation!! Might very well have developed in parallel.
I was wondering about these two sentences:
– Was, wenn einem nicht geglaubt wird?
– Was, wenn dir keiner glaubt?
It seems like they mean pretty much the same thing. The situation I had in mind was “what if you’re telling the truth, but no one believes you.” How common is the version with “einem”, and does it feel formal or stiff to you at all?
Where does it fall on the “casual, effortless” scale, compared to something like “und jetzt wird getanzt”?
You’re kind of mixing two things here by using “dir” in the second version :)
– Was, wenn einem nicht geglaubt wird.
– Was wenn einem keiner glaubt.
I would say the second one has an edge, simply because it’s shorter and less complicated, but you can definitely also hear the first in conversation. It’s not uncommon that people talk about themselves and hide behind unspecific third person pronouns. And the first one leans a bit more toward formal contexts, like when the believing is about a formal situation, like a border crossing.
Do you mean I should have used “mir” instead of “dir”, or something else? I thought “einem” was kind of flexible in the sense that I can use it to refer to myself, but it’s vague enough that the person I’m talking to could also feel included. Like what if it happened to you, or a generic “you” (someone in general). Is that wrong?
And yeah, I had border crossings in mind. I got asked if I was a citizen maybe 20 years ago, the one time I was close to the Mexican border. They didn’t end up asking for papers, but they didn’t want to believe me. I wasn’t even at the border, it was just a state line nearby.
What I meant was that you used “einem” in your first example and “dir” in the second and that choice affects tone. For comparison, it’s better to use “einem” in both versions.
I’d say overall, Germans would use the “einem” phrasing to make it sound “general” as opposed to “DUUU”.
I don’t notice “lassen” sentences very often, but just after reading this article, I got an email about a forgotten bottle with this sentence:
“Lassen Sie es mich gerne wissen, wer sie vergessen hat!”
Is that just a normal formal sentence, or does it feel as stiff to you as it does to me?
It’s a bit formal, but not super stiff. Definitely a common choice in a context like this.
I think the “lassen” sentences are fairly common in contexts of getting services, like getting a haircut, manicure, consulting or some kind of repair
I’m with Elsa, the number one way I would say this is “my couch is getting delivered tomorrow.” This could work too:
So nix the “be,” and “couch” has to go between the parts of the verb (“getting delivered”). I guess it’s kind of like the Thema/Rhema thing you’ve mentioned for modal particles. “I’m getting” is the setup and “couch delivered” is the payoff. Plus it just rolls off your tongue that way.
Off topic: Is there a way to change my avatar? It’s a purple monster now. I liked being a crazy blue tree :)
Oh okay, so it’s not the structure, but just the tense and the word order that I had wrong?
– I’ll be getting my couch delivered tomorrow… wrong.
– I’m getting delivered my couch… wrong
– I’m getting my couch… right
Correct?
About the avartars… mine changed as well. I recently modified some things relating to page loading speed, which seems to have messed with these little pictures. Mine changed as well and I’m not happy either. I’ll try to see if I can roll it back, but there’s a good chance that I cannot :/
Yeah, that’s pretty much it.
– I’ll be getting my couch delivered tomorrow… NAH but see note below.
– I’m getting delivered my couch… OUCH :(
– I’m getting my couch… YAY!
Re: the first one, I took a look at Google and there are about 10 results for similar sentences. (Search was “be getting * delivered”). For example:
Hallo,
Hier werden einige Typos korrigiert :)
“tripple meaning” (triple meaning)
“a elementary school teacher” (an elementary school teacher)
“it can even works” (it can even work)
“it’s something you can totally find it in daily life” (it’s something you can totally find in daily life)
“I’ll be getting delivered my couch tomorrow” (this is the literal translation, bur would never work in English, we’d say “my couch is getting delivered (to me) tomorrow”)
“The first versions sounds” (The first version sounds)
“is actually very wishy-washy concept” (is actually a very wishy-washy concept)
“I think it’s does deserve” (I think it does deserve)
“because context” (because of context)
Great article, I think I have enough Sprachgefühl for this, but Iäm not quite sure, not until you do the bigger quiz. But I have a question:
Can “Das is nicht lesbar” also be said as “Das ist nicht zu lesen”?
Thanks and bis bald!!
Bei Elsa wird sich bedankt!
Quick follow up about “Because context.”
I meant it as a sort of exclamation, like “Because: reasons.” Do I need the colon to make it work?
re “lesbar”:
Both are technically correct, but “lesbar” feels much smoother.
That does depend on the verb though. Or how established the adjective is.
– Das ist nicht zu schaffen.
– Das ist nicht schaffbar.
Here, the first one is way more common.
Danke! Yes, you do need the colon to make it work :))
mega! giga!
this article is the meat to go with the taters (normal or oat).
if the workshop assisted your mind in finishing this piece, that’s quite a testimonial. their website does look cool / interesting i must say.
ich habe eine Frage.
it has to with intentions/Absichten.
“ich habe ein Glas fallen lassen.”
ok it means ‘i dropped a glass’ .. it shatters – whoops, sorry bout that.
but it does not mean, i think – “on purpose”.
i let the glass fall –
(implying i allowed it to happen, made it happen, or at least could have prevented it)
u know what i mean? I’d have to add “mit Absicht” oder so was in order to clarify that, right?
a different example: (pardon the English)
i had my bicycle stolen.
means –
1: my bike was stolen (simply so) -> passive
2: i was behind the theft, i orchestrated it. -> passive/aggressive
that ambiguity can be difficult to resolve, and context tends to save the moment, yet i wonder:
did something happen and the sentence merely describes it (nothing further)
-or-
did the action occur because of some extra force or intention making it so?
how do we show that in German?
i will leave it at that.
Actually, “fallen lassen” is unspecific as to intent.
– Lassen Sie die Waffe fallen!
– Drop the weapon!
Here, the context makes it clear that we mean intentional dropping.
– Ich habe das Glas fallen lassen.
Here, most people would assume “accident” because it’s not “normal” to drop glasses on purpose but it’s quite normal that they accidentally fall.
To indicate intent, you’d add “mit Absicht” or “absichtlich”
– Ich habe das Glas absichtlich fallen lassen.
Does that help?
Or “Das Glas ist mir ‘runtergefallen.”, though maybe a tad colloquial here.
Yeah, that’s a pretty clear accident then. Unless you say it with a super ironic voice.