Hello everyone,
and welcome to our German Word of the Da…y. And this time we will take on one of THE MOST words the German language has to offer… most what you ask? Well, most common, most confusing, most short and al-most in every sentence. We will look at the meaning of:
da
So what is this da? Let’s look it up an a dictionary, maybe Leo.org… just one seconnnd… WHAT? No translations found??? What is wrong with you stupid dictiona… oh… ops … I misspelled it, my bet …all right, now I got it… so the first translation of da is there. And the second translation is here? Whaaaaaaaaaat? That doesn’t make any goddamn sense… how can something mean there and here at the same time? Oh wait there is more… da can also mean then? And because? This is soooo confusing… hey, hey uhm… guys, it is really hot today so would you mind if take it easy we talk about the word Bus inste… oh you would? Ugh fine… so da it is. But it’ll be a lot and I won’t fake enthusiasm…
Da has an origin.
Something Indo-European. It’s history so it’s really boring. The same origin brought us such great words like der, die, das, all three all time favorites of the German learning community. Da is also related to the but the closest English brothers are there and then. Back a few centuries, I think the period is called midevil age, da used to have an r… so it was rda… uh… I mean dar. In fact it is still there in those infamous da-word like darauf or darunter… we’ll talk about those later. But for the most part dar faced the same fate as the eastern part of Germany did in 1990… it was “Ge-De-rrt”…. … … politics and grammar puns… so lame.
Anyway, the r is gone for the most part. Germans soon fell in love with the new da and here we are … we use da for everything. Literally. But let’s go step by step and start with the original meaning.
Da as there
So … originally da meant there as in not here or at that location. And it still has this meaning.
- Das Kino ist da hinten.
- The cinema is back there.
- Letzten Sommer war ich an der Ostsee. Aber da war es mir zu voll.
- Last summer, I was at the Baltic Sea. But it was too crowded for me there.
Now, to really understand da as a whole, it is worth it to take a closer look at the function of there/da in those 2 examples.
The first one doesn’t make much sense, at least if it is not accompanied by a gesture of some kind… like for instance a pointing index finger. So there and da are kind of empty. They are just the verbal counterpart for the gesture.
The second example is different. This makes perfect sense. There/da work like a pronoun here… I don’t want to say an der Ostsee again so I use a stand in to shorten my sentence. If we want to replace persons or things we use stuff like he, she or them… for locations we often use da (or there).
Now… does that mean that the first and the second da are different? Well, not really… in both cases we can interpret da as a verbal index finger pointing to a location… in the first example, the location is specified by a real index finger, in the second the location was specified in the first part of the sentence. What does da dut dudely do? It points toward a location, so it can be the answer to where?.
All right.
Now, there is one very important difference between da and there when it comes to pointing to a location. I have said it in a number of times already but I’ll say it again… as far as location goes, there are 3 possible informations you can give:
- origin (where from?)
- current location (where?)
- destination (where/where to?)
This is universally true. Now, the thing with German is that German ALWAYS marks in some way or another which of the 3 your indication of location is…. always. English doesn’t really care, so sometimes you mark and sometimes you don’t.
- I’m there.
- I’m go there.
Now… there can be used to replace a location AND a destination. It can answer where? and where to?.
Da can ONLY answer to where?. If your asking for a destination (or an origin but that’s too much for today) da can NEVER be a fine answer. So if you want to answer a where to question you need to mark your da… you mark it so it is clear that you are talking about destination and in this case the mark is the most common and most generic destination marker we have… hin.
- Ich gehe dahin.
- Ich gehe da…. is really really wrong.
So… when you talk about a location that is somehow the answer to where? then there translates to da. If your location is in fact a destination so it somehow is the answer to where to?, then there translates to dahin.
- Im Park ist ein Konzert. Thomas ist da.
- There is a concert in the park. Thomas is there. (where is Thomas/ What‘s Thomas’ location)
- Im Park ist ein Konzert. Thomas geht dahin.
- There is a concert in the park. Thomas is going there. (where is Thomas going/what‘s his destination)
All right. Cool.. oh wait.. I almost forgot: no enthusiasm. As shown da can mean there. There is another word in German that can mean there. We will look at this word now.
da vs dort
The word is dort. So what is the difference between da and dort? Does German have here, there and uber-there? No. Dort actually used to be the translation of there in sense of a destination… so it was
- Ich gehe dort… used to be correct but those days are long gone, it is super wrong now
- Ich gehe dorthin… is correct now
Anyway… dort has lost this indication and today it is just answering to at what location. The difference between da and dort is rather small as far as location is concerned. Some people might argue that dort is like really far away while da is only sort of away…
- Marie war letztes Jahr in Autralien. Sie hat da/dort als Au Pair gearbeitet.
- Marie was in Australia last year. She worked as an AuPair there.
but I don’t know… I am not a geograstry-genius but I think Australia is kind of far away from Berlin and still da and dort are perfectly fine. In the end it is a regional thing and if you don’t want to take my word for it because I can’t say geoblahbla… well then here’s a source. It is in German but the maps are in Color.
So… they are both interchangeable in sense of there /not here, but still, there is a difference between da and dort. Dort is 100% about location. Dort can only ever refer to locations that are NOT here. Da on the other side can refer to almost everything as we’ll see later. So … I think you can always replace dort by da but not the other way around.
Movin’ on. Hoora… oh wait… no enthusiasm.
da means here – or does it?
We looked up da in the dictionary. There it said, da can mean here. How weird. Let’s do a boring example. Imagine a really boring seminar at collitch… you all sit and wait for Hans Gruber, your German teacher, to walk in and say his usual lame “Detective Hans is on the case.” line… but in walks Katrin, blond, blue eyed and willing.. to teach you.
- “Hans ist heute nicht da, ich bin seine Vertretung.”
- “Hans isn’t here today, I am his substitute.”
Hmmm… looks like it’s true and da can really mean here…
but does it really? And what about the English there?? Is it really as there-ish as everyone thinks?? Something just doesn’t add up here. German CSI investigates…
I see 2 people. Not sure which gender but they know each other. Swooooosh. They are in the kitchen. Both stand next to the stove looking inside a pot. One starts speaking…
- “There is still a little vegetable broth (left). Would you like some more?”
“Oh yes, you bet I do.” - “Es ist noch ein bisschen Gemüsebrühe da. Willst du noch was?”
“Oh ja, auf jeden Fall.”
Hmmm… peculiar. Both people’s heads are virtually adjacent to the soup so from there perspective the soup is definitely “here”… and still they say da in the German sentence and what’s even more important is that they use there in the English sentence. 2 Hours later, flashhhhh flash flashhhh. the same 2 people. They are in bed. Naked. Sweaty. All cuddled up. Looks like they did some sports. Maybe Pilatio. One starts speaking…
- “Thanks for making me vegetable broth honey!”
“Hey… you know I’ll always be there for you, don’t you.” - “Danke, dass du mir Gemüsebrühe gemacht hast Schatz!”
“Hey, du weißt doch ich bin immer für dich da.”
What does that mean? What place is there referring to? Where will the person always be? Why there? Why not here with the other person? Cut.
Meanwhile somewhere else. A street. Someone is asking someone else something:
- “Is there a good bar here?”
Hmmmm… . we have here and there in one sentence. A common type of sentence. Why aren’t English speakers confused by this?
The reason for all those example is this: there actually doesn’t always mean there as in over there/not here. In phrases like there is it has little to no locational content. Instead, it expresses the idea of being present… kind of like this.
- Is an ATM present somewhere here?
And that what we need because the German da is used in the exact same way…
- Thomas ist/war nicht da.
You can say this sentence in the meeting and also at home when you tell your partner about the meeting. In either case, you use da and it will be understood in THE EXACT SAME WAY. So the translation of the sentence is NOT one of those 2:
- Thomas isn’t here.
- Thomas wasn’t there.
but rather:
- Thomas is/was not present.
Only the context tells us what location we are talking about. There are many examples like this. Sometimes English uses there as well but at other times English would use here instead.
- Ich bin gleich da.
- I’ll be present right away (lit.)
- I’ll be there right away.
- Sind wir schon da?
- Are we there yet?
- Weihnachten ist da.
- Christmas is here.
In all those the point is not making a distinction between there and here but only being present at some location… what location? Context tells us. There is even a noun in German that is based on that idea.
- Das Dasein als Star ist nicht immer leicht.
- Being a star (the existence as a star) isn’t always easy.
So… what seemed to be a contradiction is in fact none. Da does not mean 2 contradictory things. Just like the English there, it sometimes refers to a specific location (not here) and sometimes it is really really broad and just expresses the idea of being present.
Now… as similar as they are there is a HUGE difference in how German and English use their being-present da. The English phrase there is is very present. But German chose a different option. We say es gibt.
- Gibt es hier einen Geldautomat?
- Is there an ATM somewhere here?
But what about the broth-example we had earlier?
- Es ist noch Suppe da.
- There is still soup left.
Here, we’re using da sein and not es gibt. So when to use which?
- Es gibt noch Suppe.
This would work too but the other one sounds better. It is kind of hard give a clear rule when to use which and I believe that in many instances they are interchangeable. A possible guide line could be this:
if there is some other indication of location in your sentence – use es gibt.
- In Berlin gibt es viele viele viele Bäume.
- In Berlin, there are many many many trees.
If we were to phrase that using da sein, we would wind up having 2 things that have the potential of answering the question where.
- In Berlin, da sind viele Bäume.
This is not wrong. Sometimes people might even use it for style reasons. Es gibt is just more common and sounds better to me. Da sind is more pointing, more palpable than the English there in there is. Or let’s try it this way:
da sein means to “be present at the location that context tells us”
while there is means just to be present without much locational implications.
All right. So originally da used to be a location pointer with a meaning of not here. But Germanic tribes felt some love for this little word. So they broadened the meaning to the point where it doesn’t mean a specific location anymore but just carries the idea of being present. But for the Germans this still wasn’t enough… why stop there when you can use da for so much more.
da – the verbal index finger
As a matter of fact the German da can be used to point at pretty much anything. A prime example for this are the da-words.
I have talked about those in detail here, so we’ll keep it brief. Da-words can point to things (or replace them if you will) and actions that have been mentioned before (or are about to be mentioned). And English has them too.
- Ich esse um 8 Abendbrot. Danach sehe ich fern.
- At 8 I eat dinner. Thereafter, I watch TV.
There does not really point to a location here. It points to dinner or to eating dinner … doesn’t really matter … but it does not point to dinner table. However, English doesn’t use them that much. Germans do. Germans do use da-words. Da-words are everywhere. the da is like a verbal index finger pointing at something that has been said before. Instead of saying for that or with that or on that we say therefor, therewith or thereon. And that is in fact practical. What? Oh no no no… I DID say practical, not annoying… you know… that can be dem, der, das, den or die… but we can always say “look there!” or “on/with/by/after what’s there”. When you use a da-word neither case nor gender matter. So they actually should be students best friend.
Anyway… I don’t know if that is the reason or not, but it could be… da-words sound nice and they save case-hassle. Oh by the way… I have another theory for why we love our da-words so much but … I won’t tell you now :). It has to do with a core idea of German that explains almost everything but I want to save it for the sentence structure posts. So you’ll have to wait :).
One last thing about the da-words… there has been a tendency recently to split them up and disperse the parts across the sentence because… that is how we roll :). It is already sort of standard in spoken for the combinations with hin and her. Here’s an example:
- Ein eigenes Pony – da träume ich seit Jahren von.
- Ein eigenes Pony – davon träume ich seit Jahren
- My own pony – I’ve been dreaming of that for years.
- Deutsche Grammatik – Da habe ich immer noch viele Probleme mit.
- Deutsche Grammatik – Damit habe ich immer noch viele Problem.
- German grammar – I still have lots of fun with that.
This must be a slap in the face for students who have finally internalized that final short words like von or vor are part of the verb…. so what’s the verb in the second example? Mithaben? No… it is just haben and the mit at the end belongs to the da at the very beginning and damit is a weird way of saying mit das. Sorry :). I know it sucks. These split up da-words are definitely something you can hear in daily life.
Anyway… soooooo the da-words use the location pointer da as an index finger to point at (or replace) pretty much anything.
But da is also used alone to point to stuff… things, events, life phases, time… you name it.
- Die 3 Geschlechter im Deutschen sind ganz schön anstrengend, aber da muss man durch wenn man die Sprache lernen will.
- The 3 genders in German are quite exhausting but one has to get through that if one wants to learn the language.
- Thomas hat gestern Marias Sex and the City DVD Box verbrannt. Da war sie ganz schön sauer.
- Thomas burned Maria’s Sex and the City DVD box set yesterday. She was really angry (then).
- Thomas hatte gerade angefangen zu duschen, da klingelte das Telefon.
- Thomas had just started taking a shower, when the phone rang.
- Ich machte die Kühlschranktür auf. Das Sixpack Bier, das ich vor 1 Stunde reingestellt hatte, war weg. Da wusste ich: mein Mitbewohner hat ein Alkoholproblem.
- I opened the fridge. The six pack of beer I had put inside an hour before was gone. It was then that I knew: my flat mate had a drinking problem.
Da even has become an intro word… so just like dass or ob it can start minor sentences.
- Da ich Hunger habe, esse ich.
- Because I am hungry I eat.
This da is pretty much a synonym for weil. It means because and unlike denn it has the same grammar as weil and you can technically replace any weil with da and still have a grammatically correct sentence.
In practice da-sentences tend to be in front of the main sentence while weil sentences are more often placed after it. Also, da-sentences are usually a bit longer and they sound more official. You can find this da in newspapers a lot but in every day conversation it is somewhat rare I’d say.
So it is up to you whether you learn it or not. Now… how is that da tie in with the index-finger idea? Well, it might be a little far fetched but to me it makes sense and I can see a connection… kind of like this
- There, I am hungry! I’ll eat now.
Maybe people just used it that way and used the weil-word order. But I don’t know for fact.
Anyway… we have seen, that da can be used to point at pretty much anything… anything BUT 2 things. We already know that da can’t point to persons…. what? … oh… oh we know that because I briefly mentioned it :)… seriously.. check out the post on the da-words to learn more (I’ll add the link below). Now, what is the second thing at which da can’t point? It is manner, mode or simply the answer to how?.
- You can’t just take the exam without ever having attended the classes. It doesn’t work that way.
- Du kannst nicht einfach die Klausur schreiben ohne jemals in der Vorlesung gewesen zu sein. Da funktioniert das nicht….
I used the same logic as before but still this is not just wrong… it is not even close to being understandable. The German word to point at how-related things is … drumroll… so.
- … So funktioniert das nicht.
All right. So let’s sum this up… Da is a very mighty verbal reference. Whenever you see da in a sentence, you can think of it as an index finger pointing at something that has been mentioned before… be it a location, a time, as part of a da-word a thing or an activity… it can even start a sentence that gives a reason. The only 2 things it can’t point at are “people” and “manners” so da can never be part of the answer to who or how.
So… and now we’re left with one burning question:
Whyyyyyyyyyyyy?
Why do Germans love their da so much?
I can’t really give you an answer to that but I think what it actually is is a love for “location” in general. The question word wo means where so it asks for a location. But you can find examples in abundance in which wo is not really related to location …in standard high German, wo is used to ask for things:
- Woran denkst du?
- What are you thinking about?
in daily speech people use it for time:
- Heute ist der dritte Tag in Folge, wo ich nicht arbeiten muss.
- Today is the third day in a row that I don’t have to work.
and some dialects in the southwest do really really really nasty stuff:
- Der Mann, wo mich angerufen hat, ist mein Vater.
- The man, where called me, is my dad (lit.)
- The man who called me is my dad.
So the German language has a tendency to speak in locations. I don’t know why this is neither where this comes from but it is a fact. German is a very 3D-Space language and when people talk they use their verbal index finger da to point at things in this language space.
Does that mean that you should use da all the time? Well, in fact not.
As far as actively using it goes I’d suggest to stick with the local meaning and the da-words for now. Using da for time or other stuff needs some feel for the language. Sometimes it works perfectly but sometimes it sounds horribly out of place too.
All right. I think that’s enough for today. This was our German Word of the Day da. It is a location pointer meaning not here but, just like its English brother there it is also used in a broader sense of being present. By the way… I am really interested if this is a universal feature. How is that in your language? Is the word for there also used without any specific locational meaning… for stuff like:
- I’ll be there for you.
Anyway… with the exception of persons and manners of doing things da can be used to point to all kinds of stuff like time, place, events, things, activities … think of the word like an index finger.
If you have any questions or suggestions just leave me a comment. I hope you liked it and see you next time…
And have fun with you new Ohrwurm :D… I don’t know why they did it.. maybe they just loved the word soooo much
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for all of your hard work.
I just wanted to say quickly that the following sentence example you gave doesn’t make sense in English.
“An own pony – I’ve been dreaming of that for years.”
*My* own pony <—- makes perfect sense, but never *an*.
Hey everybody, I got an *own* pony/car/computer/insert-your-own-noun for my birthday! …for example, makes no sense what-so-ever.
Thanks :)
Best German lesson I ever had! And yes it is sooo complicated to understand when to use these small little words like da and etc. which are constantly used by Germans!!! And I can not agree more on ” The same origin brought us such great words like der, die, das, all three all time favorites of the German learning community.” ha ha ha And the Baltic sea has absolutely bought by heart ;)
PS for the same of truth I managed only half of it… :)
Thanks for that nice feedback. It left me a little confused though. I I feel like I’m not getting something about the Baltic sea :D…
Wait, I just remembered that you are from Lithuania I hope I didn’t mix it up)… that explains the Baltic Sea :)
Exactly! ;)
So imagine there is an empty seat next to me at a café, you want to sit down, but my friend is coming in five minutes, but I say something like “Mein Freund kommt gleich, aber bitte setzen Sie sich bis dahin”, ie you can sit down until that particular point in time. Is “dahin” correct or is it “da”? Or is neither correct, and I am completely wrong :)
On the temporal “da”, such as “Thomas hatte gerade angefangen zu duschen, da klingelte das Telefon” I vaguely remember somebody telling me that the “da” also communicates not only the temporal sequence of events, like “dann” would, but also that the second action was unexpected or surprising. Is this correct?
On the causal “da”, such as “Da ich Hunger habe, esse ich”, I even more vaguely remember somebody (could be the same somebody, or some other somebody, not sure) saying that the difference between “da” and “weil” is that we use “da” when the reason is already known to the listener, and we simply giving further information. Is this correct?
Man,that is exactly how it works… you used “da” in a temporal context and because your time in point is a “destination” you added hin… pitch perfect :)!
There is a little issue though with that specific situation. For “setzen” the answer to “where” is more relevant than the answer to “when”. So the first impulse is to interpret the “dahin” as a localisation. The seit before contradicts that, and eventually one understands but it feels a little strange. You could solve the problem by adding another hin (and a modal so hinsetzen is at the end)
– Sie können sich bis dahin gerne hinsetzen.
Now our desire for a location is satisfied by the generic “hin” and nothing is pulling the “dahin” away from the temporal domain. But as soon as you have no special need for a location “bis dahin” works perfectly
– Ich sehe meine Freundin in 2 Tagen und ich hoffe bis dahin ist alles wieder gut.
Next point:
Does the temporal “da” imply the element of surprise? It can but it also cannot… so basically context implies it. The word itself is empty in that regard… here’s my proof.
– “Du hast versprochen, dass du kommst.”
– “Ja, aber da wusste ich noch nicht, dass ich arbeiten muss.”
This “da” is doing one thing… pointing to the moment of the promise. Nothing else:)
And finally:
Does the because-da imply that the information is known? Clearly no. Again, only context implies that. The word itself is empty.
– Da ich nächste Woche nicht in Berlin bin, kann ich den Termin leider nicht wahrnehmen.
I am using “da” here to make it sound official, because it starts the sentence, and because we are talking future, but the information is definitely new. If someone else has a different use of “da”… well, that is of course possible but it is not a feature of the word itself :)
In your last example, I’ve always translated da as “since” instead of seeing it as a synonym for weil. Sure, they could be interchanged and still mean the same thing, but I think it flows better, especially when starting a sentence with it. Would you suggest “since” as a good translation for da in this case? In English it would be extremely rare to hear someone start a sentence with “because…” unless of course they’re answering a question. But you’d never hear someone say something like “because it was raining, I had to take a cab home.” I don’t know if its common in German to start a sentence with weil, but in English you will almost always hear someone say “since” at the start of a sentence like this, and so I always use da accordingly when I’m saying something similar in German.
Hmmm.. this is a hard question for me. I am not a native speaker of English and I have not enough Sprachgefühl to make any judgment as to whether da “feels” like since. But based on what you’ve written about the usage I’d say more no than yes. They are similar in that they are used to start with an causal-clause. Having weil at the beginning is indeed rare in spoken… but I think that is more a feature of the brain than of language. You usually describe reality first before you explain it at least when you talk about mundane things… that’s how I feel at least. So… initial weil is rare but initial da is too in casual conversation. As for writing… in a well crafted text a weil can work in the beginning. It all depends on how it connects to what came before. I think (this is really just a gut feeling), those weils will often be accompanied by a jedoch so the weil sentence gives a reason for something that contradicts something that has been said before.
– Julia kochte Suppe für Thomas. Weil er jedoch schon gegessen hatte, blickte er nur auf den Teller.
Maybe in English this would be a “but because”… “since” would feel a little dry to my… anyway… a “da” would be even dryer. So bottom line… I think in daily speech, “since” is more common and natural than “da”.
Oh… but there is one more thing “da” and “since” do have in common…. for reasons that don’t really directly cause something, “weil” would be a little strong…
– Since you’re here we might as well talk.
– You’re here SO we might as well talk.
– Da du nun mal da bist, können wir genausogut reden.
– Du bist da, ALSO können wir genausogut reden.
So… here we are not really introducing a reason but rather just circumstances if that makes sense… in the second version of the sentence “therefor” or “that’s why” the main sentence brothers of “because” would sound odd/too strong but “Da” works really well in that situations, be it in spoken or in written.
Finally, here are 2 Google n-grams to compare… great thing that this is case sensitive :)
http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Da+er%2CWeil+er%2C+weil+er%2C+da+er&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=
http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Since+he%2CBecause+he%2Csince+he%2Cbecause+he&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=
hope all that helped a little although it was ramblin’
As a native English speaker, I have always thought of the causal use of “da” as the English word “as”. Like “da”, it can be used at the beginning of a sentence as well as a sub clause: “Da es regnet, meine Haare sind nass ODER Meine Haare sind nass, da es regnet.” Take these two sentences and you can use “as” for the English: “As it is raining, my hair is wet” OR “My hair is wet, as it is raining.” Again, like the German “da”, the English “as” sounds official in the causal use and you couldn’t say the sentence above to your friends without sounding strange; it’s used much more often in written language, which I think is yet another reason to translate using “as” rather than “since”. Hope that helps!
I think you’re right… I have thought about it and I think the because-da and the because-as are really quite close :)
Just to go back to Will’s example and how Germans love the word “wo”, let’s pretend you’re a little slow to understand when exactly you can no longer sit there – would you ask “Bis wohin? Sobald Ihr Freund ankommt?” Or would it just be as simple as saying “bis wann?”
Oh great question… it has to be “Bis wann”. “Wohin” doesn’t have any temporal capacity at all which is strange because “wonach” or “woraufhin” do. It’s strange and I don’t know why this is but it probably just “happened” to be that way :)
Just thought of this:
Setzen Sie sich bis dahin dahin.
First one’s temporal second one local:D
Da da da da, da da da da da, da?
Da da, da da: da da da.
Da da!
Words of wisdom … well spoken :)!!
Ah welt worth the wait you made me suffer through! Danke, noch ein toller Post!
Of course I’m a stickler though and will point out a few mistakes, such as your Da vs Dort section being labeled “Da vs Dor” which at first made me think there was a new word I never heard of haha
Also, in your example involving Thomas burning Maria’s Sex in the City DVD box, your German example says “vor 2 Monaten” but your English translation says “yesterday” (unless you were implying that for Maria it still feels like yesterday haha). And then in the following example with the six pack of beer, you wrote “Das Sixpack Bier dass ich…” but shouldn’t that be “Das Sixpack Bier DAS ich…” instead?
It should be “das” and it shouldn’t be that my post is so full of mistakes… too much editing afterwards and too little (no) proofreading :)… thank you soooooo soo so much for finding and telling me!!!!! It really really helps me :D!
Thank you for SUPER lesson. As Slovenian speaker I don’t have many problems with davon, dafür etc. because we use the same type of syntax trick in Slovenian.
However, this lesson was very interesting for me because there is no such structure as ”there is”, ”es gibt” or ”da ist” in my language. In Slovenian you can just say that someone or something IS or IS NOT here or there.
”I’ll be there for you” > In Slovenian I think the only possible structure would be ”I’ll (always) be at you”.
Oh cool :)… so there is another language that uses da-words… and I guess Slovenian is related to other Slavic languages so they might have it to. Maybe it is some old human way of seeing the world… from a local perspective. Or it is juts coincidence :)
In Slovenian structures like davon and dafür, the function of ”da” has word ”to”, which means ”this” and is – like in German – joined by preposition.
However, I have a question for you.
Is it possible to paraphrase ”Es gibt ein Problem” into ”Da ist ein Problem/Ein Problem ist da”?
According to Google I would say it’s not good idea but I don’t get why.
Would ti be better to say ”Da haben wir ein Problem”?
Hmmm … not really possible :)… the reason is that “da” feels like a pointer. I actually made an edit to the post yesterday that might explain it. Here is what I added. The being there-da does have some pointing capacity. So “da sein” means:
– being present at THE location that is given by the context
“there is” on the other hand sometimes has NO pointing capacity at all… so that would be:
– being present
That is what “es gibt” is. If you use “da sein” for “es gibt” you’re all of a sudden pointing somewhere. If context doesn’t give us any clue what “there” is then it won’t work. Hope that helps a bit… if not please ask again :)
In England we say “I’ll be there for you”, meaning ‘I’ll be right there by your side in times of trouble’, and we also say “I’ll be here for you”, meaning ‘I’ll wait here for you until you need me’.
Interesting, I tried out “hier” in German but it doesn’t feel particularly idiomatic
– Ich bin hier für dich.
I’d be like.. “What do you mean? Right here? What if I need you elsewhere?”. Okay, I guess I’m exaggerating a bit.
It’s hard to explain this, but it isn’t really relating to ‘where’ I am, it’s more like expressing the notion of being true/loyal/available/of service. I’ll be here for you (because I’m going nowhere without knowing you’re ok). Ha – I’ve probably made it even more confusing!
I’m a native spanish speaker, and we don’t have a single translation for this word. Really, there is no an “there” word lol.
If you want to say “I’ll be there for you” you must say totally different phrases like:
“soy tu amigo fiel” (I’m your loyalty friend)
or just say:
“estare para ti” (I’ll be for you)
Because there isn’t a brother word for there/da.
Spanish does not have any sort of this logic, that’s why it is so hard for us to understand English/German! Sorry about my english lol.
Gracias :)…. that was really interesting. I guess it’s going to be similar for the other Roman languages
I am also a native Spanish speaker and I’ll have to say I don’t agree with what Carlos is saying. At least in Mexico (and I’m pretty much convinced in other Spanish-speaking countries) we have a word that works very similar to “da” in this example and that word is “ahí”:
“I’ll be there for you” can be translated into “(Siempre) estaré ahí (contigo)”. The “contigo” can be removed as it can be understood from context. Also “siempre” is not really needed, it just helps convey the idea that you will ALWAYS be there for someone (always =siempre) .The “ahí” word doesn’t have a specific localization here, so it serves the same purpose as da or there.
As for other Romance languages, one could argue they have similar words for this type of constructions:
French: y = j’y serai (pour toi)
Portuguese: aí = eu vou estar aí (com você)
Italian: ci = io ci sarò (per te)
Maybe some native speakers of those languages can correct me if I’m wrong. :)
I’ll have to ask some Italian friends of mine… so the question is still open after all :). Thanks a lot, that was very interesting!
I was thinking about “eso” as a translation of “da”…. Dafür = por eso… Damit = con eso…. At least on the case of da + preposition…. For “da” alone, I guess can be “ahí”….
Thank you for your amazingly clear and funny explanations…. I am a huge fan of your blog!
great to hear that, thanks :)
Good. Though I must say Scheiss auf da. This has cleared up a couple of portions (foggified some ones that were previously clear too :D) Though, Im reading a book now and I know about “da” at the start of a sentence meaning “because” or “since” (instead of “there” but I understand you used “there” because it’s the theme of the essay), however I didnt know about it altering the structure the opposite of “weil”. Wow, was fur eine verdammte Sprache.
Ha… “Scheiß auf da!”… that won’t work ;). I think even if you try ignoring “da” the meaning will at some point sink in just because you see it so much.
One thing… you mentioned “da” at the beginning of a sentence… just to make sure… it can mean all kinds of things. It only means “because/since” if the verb moves to the end… here’s an example
– Thomas wollte gerade ins Bett gehen, da klingelte das Telefon
– Thomas was about to go to bed when the phone rang.
This temporal “da” (“then/at that time”) is very common in books so I’m sure you’ll see that quite some times.
Also, you HAVE to tell me about the now foggified (vernebelt) things :D. I shall not rest until those are clear again like a winter morning
Relating an example here to the “angehen” article:
Du kannst nicht einfach die Klausur schreiben ohne jemals in der Vorlesung gewesen zu sein. So funktioniert das nicht…
Could one also say “So geht das nicht…” ? Are funktionieren and gehen more or less interchangable?
In that example, yes, in general… “jein” as we say in German. “Funktionieren” is more about a process or an approach to something. “gehen” is broader than that.
– Morgen geht bei mir nicht vor um 5.
This is a highly colloquial (an common) way of saying that you won’t have time before 5 tomorrow and there “funktionieren” would be out of place. Maybe think of “gehen” as “to work/work out” while “funktionieren” is just “to work”
– Der Kühlschrank funktioniert nicht.
I could say “gehen” here as well, but that would definitely be colloquial.
– Mein Plan hat funktioniert.
And here, it wouldn’t work.
– Mein Plan ist gegangen.
That sounds strange… as if the plan left.
So… “gehen” for “funktionieren” mostly (not always) works, the other way around may work too but not as often. Hope that helps :)
Interesting, and helpful! :) Just to take this point a little further and add another word into the mix:
Could I also say:
– Morgen klappt bei mir nicht vor um 5.
-Mein Plan hat geklappt.
Which avoids the potential confusion (at least in this 2nd example) from other interpretations of “gehen”
In my mind, I initially thought of funktionieren to be best used for technological or mechinical devices (moreso to be used for things that physically function). Definitely good to know that it fits with conceptual applications as well (plans, approaches, ideas).
Yep, klappen klappt as well. I was going to make that a WOTD by the way because in daily speech, I use that very often. In case of a plan though, the more idiomatic verb is “aufgehen”… but this really only works for a plan, or a blossom, or pants, or the sun, or the attempt to equally distribute a set of items among a gr… maybe I should make THAT a word of the day :)
Hahah that one could be a doozy.
These are really the best German lessons I’ve ever had!
Nothing like that in Russian. But then in Russian we can drop subjects or even verbs from sentences altogether and still stay cool. Ok, this will be simple sentences but still… So I guess there is not so much need for fancy words with fancy meanings. We rather ciao them goodbye once and for all :) There is dort/there for location, but da as being present does not exist. We either say “here/there” or “in the neighborhood” + “is” if it concerns things or “present” / “is” if it concerns people. Or just “is” but it might not always klingen. Or even simpler … we just say “something/somebody (in Genitiv) no” which has exactly the meaning of not being present. Like “kein Geld”. It is a perfect sentence in Russian. Everybody will get the meaning of it
Now thinking about this “kein Geld” stuff. The verb “to be” in Russian is actually a tricky one. It looks to me like it is assumed by default da sein but requires a special sentence structure. E.g. “long road” would be an incomplete sentence. But “road long” is fine and “is” is assumed to be present there. So in such simple sentences “to be” it is just goodbye’d. In longer ones it is replaced with “-“. Obviously we do not say “minus”. It works only in written texts.
I have first heard about this phenomenon in connection with Arabian but I didn’t know that Russian has that too. Somewhere, I also learned the linguistic term for it :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_copula
In Eglish there is at least one instance in spoken language where people do skip “to be”
– You ok?
but I think that’s it. And in German I don’t see that happening. It always sounds REALLY wrong. I guess because the verb has such a dominion over a German sentence (position two, end of the sentence)… we’re real verb huggers, I guess
Skipping of “to be” and derivatives is very common. In spoken language it works fine but mostly for simple sentences. In written literature it is all over the place. As I said in long and complex multi-level sentences it is perfectly fine to substitute “to be” with “-“. Actually, it will be strange and ugly if you do not do it. It will be out-modish. I really mean it. Like 1000 years old a-la old religious stuff noone can understand today.
As for other verbs, we need them to build proper sentences. Otherwise sentence has no action and little meaning. But we are much easier with subjects and they can be derived from the context. Like for “do you want a beer?” we would just say “will beer?” Makes lots of sense, right? Hm.. Actually, might work in German – “willst ein Beer?” oder? Or “wanna beer?” in English
That’s a hard question.. about skipping the pronoun. I think it is actually a regional thing. I would never do it but the reason is not so much the grammar but rather the rhythm.
– WILLste MITkomm?
The “ste” is a combination of the ending “st” and the “du” what it does is add an unstressed syllable between two stressed ones. BAMMbaBAMM
Without that, it feels truncated to me but I do think people from southern Germany would do that.
– Willst mitkommen?
– Mogst an Bier? (Magst du ein Bier haben?) Bavarian
However, I do often skip the personal pronouns in SMS… especially the “ich”
– Hab gestern Nudeln gekocht. War super lecker. Weiß noch nicht was ich heute mache.
It only works if the pronoun would have been in position 1.
– Gestern hab Nudeln gekocht…. this is super wrong sounding and I don’t think anyone does it.
Is Russian like Italian, where you’re kind of supposed to skip it or is it just in spoken?
Cannot say for Italian. But Russian is really easy about subjects as well as the order of words. Both in spoken and written. This is particularly so in songs and poetry where common sentence structures are bent to extremes to find better forms :) In this sense all of the following is grammatically correct in Russian:
– Ich hab gestern Nudeln gekocht
– gekocht Ich hab gestern Nudeln
– Nudeln gekocht Ich hab gestern
– gestern Nudeln gekocht Ich hab
and so on with all possible permutations. There is simply no required words order in Russian. There are though some structures which might sound like “what?!” But they still work in songs and poetry and similar.
As for your question… No, we are not supposed to skip it. You can always say it/write it. However, there is a type of sentences which is even not allowed to have a subject. E.g. “it is getting cold”. There is no thing in Russian which can be made responsible for the “it” part. There is no abstract “it”. Such sentences are kind of reflexive in their logic without a reflexive part. If that makes sense.
No abstract “it”? Then sentences like the following must give you a headache:
– Es wird nicht geschlafen.
As for structure, I guess German is between Russian and English… just like Geography :)…. we do have some freedom to move things around but not like THAT :D… I bet you can convey a LOT of nuanced meanings with all these orders
No, I have no problems with abstract “it” whatsoever. It is Russian which is more flexible here, not German or English :)) But you are right, I do not understand that sentence. Though not for “es”. Schlafen in Passiv?! What the heck..
Moving things around is very powerful. One can really stress meanings in written language the way it is typically stressed on spoken. That is probably why you need so many little and meaningless on their own words in German and there is none in Russian. And btw prepositions are not movable. So here German in a sense gets an extra point for nuanced meanings :)
The sentence as it stands means “sleeping is being done”. German can make a passive of ANY verb, even modal ones.
– Erst wird gemusst, dann wird gedurft.
This could be a very very strange way to tell your kids that they first have to do their chores before playing or watching TV.
The reason this is possible is that we are using “werden” for it so there is no collision between this and “to be”, as there is in English or Italian. I don’t know if you’ve read the post on “werden”. I explain more about that there.
As for the particles… yes, we do use those a LOT. What’s weird though is that English is super strict about word order AND has no particles. So I wonder what their way is for all those nuances… maybe th stuff like “I guess, actually, probably, basically…”
What do you mean by prepositions being movable? Do you mean the prefixes… like
– Auf mache ich die Tür.
Those function as adverbs in these occasions :).
I have read in a book once about an experiment where they would take a text, then translate it to a language, then to the next and so on (6 languages in total) and then back to the original … and they would compare the intermediate results with the original. Russian added a LOT of color, flourish and poeticness :D
Argh… There is no real continuous time in Russian. Just simple past, present and future. There is also no real passive. Just a simple reflexive. “A letter is being written” would be “A letter writes itself”. You can even do a “sleep self” action to yourself and it is not just a grammatical Witz but a commonly used thing. Like “To me slept myself not really good tonight” which is pretty much equivalent to “I did not sleep well tonight”. And notice the total absence of object in the first case :) Ahh and that Konjunktiv stuff is made by one extra two- and sometimes even one-letter word added to the sentence with the verb in the past tense and …. done! That is why all these verb structures, and esp. in German, look so much awkward to me. Not that I have big problems understanding the underlying logic but it just feels soooooooo redundant…
Well actually…
– Ich war fertig.
– Ich wäre fertig.
– Ich hatte gegessen.
– Ich hätte gegessen.
– Ich aß.
– Ich äße.
– Ich gab.
– Ich gäbe.
Conjunctive is often just an umlaut away from past :)
I kinda like the Genitive+no version. It has a very poetic feel for me.
– Of money, no.
As for “da”… well I’ll be REALLY crazy now but how about this… “da” means “yes”. We could say this is positive… and “being present” is positive too
– Maria da.
For me it sounds local, for you it sounds affirmative (I suppose)… but she is here in both sentences, hence it’s the same word :D
Nah not really… I just LOVE fishing for common denominators, no matter how small or contrived :)
Interestingly it does not work with positive statements, i.e. one cannot say “Maria da” (da=yes) in the sense Maria is present here. I mean you surely can answer a question with da :) but cannot make a statement. You need some verb. But interestingly… it sounds somewhat ugly with “to be”. I mean you can say it but not in a general sense, rather for specific contexts. So it feels like in unpresent statements of “Maria no”, where Maria is in genitive, “no” takes over the function of action and verb.
It’sso good to finally understand the whole concept, thanks mate .. [^_^]
Malek ..
My son (20 months old as of this writing) says “da” a lot (sometimes it means “that,” sometimes “there,” often “yes”). He’s clearly going to be a natural at learning German when he goes off to Kita next year. :)
One Redewendung that doesn’t quite work in the post: “one has to go through with that” doesn’t mean what “da muss man durch” does – I think you’d be better off to say something like “one has to get through/endure/deal with/get the hang of it.” To “go through with something” (Leo has “durchziehen” or “zu Ende führen” but I don’t know if those really work either) means to do something when it would be understandable (or at least unsurprising) if you didn’t. It does need to be an action that can be completed (like “zu Ende führen” would indicate), especially something with lasting or serious consequences, which is maybe also part of why it doesn’t really feel right with learning the German genders.
– Thomas knew that if he moved to Germany, he’d have no choice but to figure out the three German grammatical genders – but he still went through with it.
– Maria was totally freaking out the night before her wedding. I’m kind of amazed that she went through with it at all.
Yeah, you’re right. The two phrasings don’t quite match up. I think “durchziehen” not so bad a translation actually.
What would you say for “da muss man durch”? Something like “You have to hang in there”? or “One has to pull through”? Is there anything more idiomatic?
Thanks in advance. And have a nice Thanks Giving by the way :)
I think any of those suggestions work well, maybe with slight rephrasing in context.
Learning the three genders in German is quite exhausting, but…
– you’ve got to hang in there…
– you’ve got to pull through…
– you’ve got to tough it out…
– you’ve got to get the hang of them…
– you’ve got to power through it…
– you’ve got to bite the bullet…
– you’ve got to get through it…
…if you really want to learn the language.
Honestly, “get through it” probably fits best from my perspective, even though it’s the most boring. :) A lot of the other ones feel a little funny with an activity like learning German grammatical genders – maybe just because I know by experience it’s just about impossible for a non-native ever to truly complete the task. “Hang in there” doesn’t quite have the sense of accomplishing a task, even though it does mean “persevere.” “Pull through” has the idea of completion/survival, but it tends to be used in situations where you don’t actually have control over the outcome (you might “pull through” a serious illness or surgery or something). “Get the hang of” is specific to this kind of task, not really synonymous with “get through.”
“Tough it out” and “power through” both work well in terms of meaning, though they’re a bit goofy and over-dramatic. :) “Bite the bullet” isn’t bad, but it’s more about facing an unpleasant experience than accomplishing a difficult task. (So to me, it fits the situation…)
Just one more reason “get” is the best verb ever. Just the sort of all-purpose verb for all those situations where German doesn’t even bother with a verb at all.
Ich wünsche dir auch ein schönes Thanksgiving! Bin heute wie immer sehr dankbar für deinen Blog. :)
“to tough it out” :D. Das klingt so Amerikanisch für mich. Alles klingt immer ein bisschen cooler als die Wirklichkeit, wenn du weißt was ich meine. Vielen Dank für die Vorschläge… ich werde die “get”-version nehmen.
I recently had some of my german corrected by someone online who put “da” right at the from of a sentence but I’m still not really sure how this “da” works or how I know when to use it.
Originally I wrote: “Jetzt Weihnachten und Silvester vorbei sind, muss ich leider zurück in die Arbeit gehen, aber das waren tollen zwei Wochen!”
which was corrected to: Jetzt, da Weihnachten und Silvester vorbei , muss ich leider zurück in die Arbeit gehen, aber das waren tollen zwei Wochen!”
In English: Now Christmas and New Year are over I have to go back to work, but they were a great two weeks! (referring to the Christmas holidays).
So my questions are, does “da” here mean “weil”? How would I know when to use “da” like this? and why is the sentance wrong when it has no “da” at all (I ask because it sounds fine in English?)
I would appreciate some help with this!
So first of yes, the “da” is roughly a “weil” here. You can always use “da” instead of “weil” but it sounds a bit technical. In this particular context though it is more of a mix of “weil” and just a generic pointer… maybe comparable to “as”…
– As she’s gone now I can play computer.
(not sure if that’s idiomatic though)
using “weil” would put a bit too much focus on the whole “reason”-idea.
Now about the sentence… I don’t think the English original is correct. I feel like there’s an “and” missing between “over” and “I”
– Now Christmas and New Year are over and I….
or it could be
– Now that Christmas and New Year are over I ….
If it’s the latter, then the da-version is the best match. If you wanted to go for the former, then we have just two normal sentences that are connected
– Jetzt (position 1) sind (position 2) Weihnac… vorbei und (new sentence) ich (position 1) muss (position 2)…
You put the verb at the end but you don’t actually have an intro-word that would demand that. Like “dass” or “weil”. And that’s why it is wrong because there’s no verb in position 2.
Hope that helps a bit.
Thank you! That helps a lot. I think you are right that the English sentence does need a “that” to be really correct, although in speech I wouldn’t always say it. I guess it could be a colloquial thing, or just a British thing, I’m not really sure!
I was going for the latter of your translations and I think in this case translating “da” to “as” works well and translating it to to “that” works even better. e.g. “Now, as Christmas and New Year are over, I have to go back to work….” or “Now that Christmas and New Year are over, I have to go back to work….”. Both sound good to me.
Thanks for your help!
Somebody may have asked this in the comments already and you may have addressed it, but I’m so sorry, I couldn’t read all the comments. :P So here goes.
I’ve seen “da” used in some contexts other than to point to something. As I can’t find a better example at the moment, I’m going to make do with an excerpt from an article I found on Der Spiegel:
“…So sieht das statistische Gesicht der Wettbewerbsverzerrung von Bayern München am Wochenende in Freiburg aus: 79:21 Prozent Ballbesitz zu Gunsten der Bayern, 667:127 angekommene Pässe, 17:9 Schüsse, 10:2 Eckbälle. Da am Ende allerdings bei aller Zahlenspielerei ein 2:1 für den SC Freiburg gegen den Meister herauskam, bleibt das böse Wort von der Wettbewerbsverzerrung im Raum stehen. ”
(I felt I had to include all that to give you the zusammenfassung”)
Now, I know what all that means and what the writer is getting at (I think), but I’m not sure I could use that “da” in the “Da am Ende…” like it is here. How exactly is it used in this context? Or rather, what is the context? :D
On a side note, I’ve decided that Zahlenspielerei is going to be my word of the week. :D
Thank you so for much for your blog. Big fan!
P.S.: If you’ve answered a similar question already, let me know. I’ll look harder :D
Oh don’t worry about asking something that has been asked before… I cannot expect anyone to read through all the comments :).
So… the “da” in your example means “because”. There is a little paragraph on that under the headline “The verbal index finger” but it’s not really very prominent.
It’s a (yet another) common use of “da”, mainly so in writing but you can find it in spoken German, too. Just think of the word as pointing to a reason :)
Oh just to make sure… it’s not connected to “am Ende” here but it could be, meaning “there, at the end”… but context and structure rule that out in this case.
Alles klar! Danke :)
Hallo Emanuel, kurze Frage – Ich habe die Tendenz die sogenannten getrennten Da-Wörter zu benutzen. Ist das in einer Prüfung, die eine formelle Diskussion sein soll, überhaupt angemessen? Sollte ich mich lieber damit zurückhalten oder einfach loslegen? Dazu noch eine kleine Anmerkung, und zwar glaube ich, dass du auch erwähnen solltest, dass die getrennten Versionen der Da-Wörter ein “dr-” am Anfang dran gehängt bekommen, wenn sie mit einer Vokal anfangen.
zB Da solltest du dir wirklich nichts draus machen.
Genau da sind wir drüber geflogen!
Da habe ich leider gar nicht dran gedacht. Tut mit leid.
Da gibt es nichts interessantes drin, schau lieber nicht hinein.
Hmmm, gute Frage. Die getrennten da-Wörter sind auf jeden Fall grade trendy. Ich benutze sie ständig. Aber sie sind von Schriftsprache noch sehr weit weg, klingen also sehr umgangssprachlich. Eine gut durchdachte Aussage, mit einem komplizierten Satz klingt mit getrennte da-Wort auf jeden Fall etwas “banaler”. Aber zu gestelztes Sprechen kommt auch wieder nicht gut. In welcher Region bist du denn? Ich glaube die getrennten da-Wörter sind typisch für den Norden (oder war es ugekehrt?? Grade bin ich mir nicht sicher).
Auf jeden Fall solltest du die mit “dr” dran vermeiden, denn die klingen nicht gut/formel. Danke für den Hinweis übrigens. Aber es ist ein bisschen komplizierter. Wenn klar der Fokus auf Bewegung liegt, dann kommt da nur ein “r” ran. Wie im letzten Satz zum Beispiel. Mit “dr” geht auch, klingt aber umgangssprachlicher. Auch vermischen sich hier zwei Sachen:
1) da + r-version von Verb
2) “echtes” getrenntes da-wort
1) Da bin ich (d)rübergeflogen.
Da bin ich reingegangen.
Man würde nicht “Darüber bin ich geflogen” sagen.
2)
Da solltest du dir nichts draus machen.
Da hab ich nix von.
Hier würde die Präfixinterpretation keinen Sinn machen.
Naja… alles fließt.
– Da bin ich drüber geflogen.
–
WEitere Beispiele
– Ich pass da nicht rein. (drein wäre sogar falsch)
– Ich fahr da nicht rüber.
Danke für deine schnelle Antwort! Ich wohne gerade in Australien, aber gucke ganz oft ein paar YouTuber die aus Berlin kommen, die oft so sprechen. Habe auch einen sechswöchentlichen Austausch in Marburg (in der Nähe von Frankfurt) gemacht, könnte auch daran liegen. Wir sollten in der Prüfung Hochdeutsch sprechen und deiner Antwort nach passen solche Konstruktionen da wirklich nicht rein. Sehr interessant, dass man einige Versionen mit r- gegen das dr- austauschen kann. Das hab ich schon sehr oft gehört aber nicht immer verstanden, da ich längst zurück in Australien bin und umgangssprachliches Deutsch tagein und tagaus nicht mehr höre, und lese stattdessen recht viel. Ich werde das öfter beachten, und werde hoffentlich dabei eine Interpretation bzw Regeln daraus formulieren. Nochmals Vielen Dank. :)
Lass mich wissen, wenn dur Reglen gefunden hast. Und viel Erfolg bei der Prüfung!! Ist das C2?
Ohhh so nice and clear, but still hard to use :))
just have one question, please
can we use “das” instead of “da” in this following sentence: “Die 3 Geschlechter im Deutschen sind ganz schön anstrengend, aber da muss man durch wenn man die Sprache lernen will.”?
Thanks alot one more
No, that wouldn’t work. “Da muss man durch” is basically a statement about traveling… you travel “through an area (of pain :) “. “da” is the proper word to refer to locations, that’s why “das” wouldn’t work.
Hope that helps :)