Hello everyone,
and welcome to a new episode of Grammar Terms Explained. And today, we’ll talk about a term that’s actually EXTREMELY exclusive. For one, because it’s exclusive to the German language, and more importantly, it’s exclusive to you.
Because I made it up :).
I’m talking of course about:
The r-version
Those of you who’ve read some of my articles from the series Prefix Verbs Explained probably remember the term because I use it in virtually every episode.
And what I mean by it are verbs like these:
raufmachen, reingehen, rauskommen,…
Now, why would I make up a term for them instead of just using the official one?
Well, because there actually ISN’T an official one. R-versions just aren’t really a thing and virtually all textbooks and courses and online content kind of ignore them or treat them as an aside.
But the r-versions are VERY common and VERY useful, especially in daily life.
So, it’s definitely time we talk about them and answer all the questions you have and didn’t even know you had :).
Like… What are they? Where are they coming from? What do they mean?
And what’s up with dr-versions and hin-versions and her-versions?
Because yes… there are multiple versions of prefix versions.
German, am I right :)?
This whole thing is going to be a two part episode – one for the basics and one for the nerdy details :).
And the first part is going to be a Q&A type format.
I started out writing and creating a narrative thread, but I kind of got lost this time and it was getting hard to follow, so I decided to take the easy way out and just run through some questions :).
But at least I’m still writing myself, like way back when, before ChatGPT, in… uh… 2022.
Oh, the good old days.
Anyway, let’s go!
Basics about r-versions
What are r-versions?
R-version is a term I started using to refer to these versions of prefix verbs that have an extra “r” at the beginning.
Like… prefix verbs are for example:
- aufmachen
- ausgehen
- einsetzen
And the corresponding r-versions are:
- raufmachen
- rausgehen
- reinsetzen
There are also other, similar versions, which we’ll get to in a second.
Do I need r-versions?
Do you need food?
Yes, you ABSOLUTELY need r-versions.
Or let me put it this way:
You cannot really speak idiomatic German without r-versions.
Yes, I really mean that!
The earlier you start getting a grip and using them, the better. Because many of them express very basic concepts that you need every day.
What do r-versions mean?
Prefix verbs are a combination of a prefix and a verb. The prefix is often a preposition and the whole thing is kind of the same deal as the English phrasal verbs, just in a different order.
- to come out
- auskommen
I mean… same deal right?
Well, NOT REALLY. Because if you want to express the actual basic idea of coming out somewhere, then auskommen is NOT the right word.
You need the r-version.
- Komm raus!
- Come out(side)!
And this is actually not an exception but the rule.
The r-version usually has the most basic, literal and “location-based” meaning you can think of when you take the combination of verb and prefix.
Sounds a bit complicated, but it’s easier than it sounds.
Suppose it’s raining and you don’t want to go outside. Do we need ausgehen or rausgehen?
We need rausgehen. Because while ausgehen is great and has a bunch of meanings, it does NOT have the most basic, most intuitive spatial meaning. That’s what the r-version is for.
- Es regnet. Ich will nicht rausgehen.
- It’s raining. I don’t want to go outside.
Now guess want rübergehen means?
Exactly… to go across.
And how about rauskommen?
Right on… to come outside.
And let me also show you an example from daily life that’s not about going somewhere.
- Das ist Kunst, kein Tisch. Bitte nichts rauflegen.
This of course means that you should not put anything on top of that thing that looks like a table but is actually art.
Because… you know… Berlin.
And no, you cannot use auflegen for this. It has all kinds of useful meanings, but the most basic idea of “laying on top” is not one of them because that literal sense is usually covered by the r-version.
And German speakers are REALLY tuned in to these r-versions. Even though it’s just one letter difference, it FEELS completely different to a German native speaker.
That’s why these r-versions are so useful, even for beginners.
So… whenever you learn a new prefix verb that can have an r-version, take a second to think about what that r-version is probably going to mean and then look it up. You’ll be pleasantly surprised at how often you at least get the gist right.
In my series prefix verbs explained, I always mention the r-version, and it’ll also play a role in the card game and app I am working on. So… lots to come.
What other “versions” are there?
Besides the r-version, you can also find her-versions, d(a)r-versions and hin-versions.
- raufgehen
- heraufgehen
- d(a)raufgehen
- hinaufgehen
Do they all mean the same?
Well, that’s a tricky question. The meanings are definitely “in the same ballpark” but I think saying that they’re the same is misrepresenting reality.
We’ll find out later, what they all are and how they relate to each other.
The most common one, at least in daily spoken German, is the r-version, which is why we use that one as a center for the whole discussion and treat the others as kind of … well… versions of the r-version.
Does every prefix verb have an r-version
Hard no!
Not all prefix verbs can have r-versions. Specifically, only the prefix verbs that start with a vowel can have an r-version, and NOT the prefix verbs with ab-, which DO NEVER have r-versions.
So here they are:
- rauf-
- raus-
- rein-
- rum-
- ran-
- rüber-
- runter-
But not every verb that CAN have an r-version actually HAS an r-version.
Prefix verbs that start with a consonant cannot have an r-version and the reason is simply that it’s impossible to pronounce.
- rvorgehen
- rzurückkommen
I mean, German can sound shitty but not THIS shitty.
Why does ab have no r-version? Well, no clue, honestly.
- rabgehen
That would work from a pronunciation point of view. But rab- just isn’t a thing.
Anyway, the verbs that CAN’T have an r-version can still have a her-version, hin-version or dr-version. Or all of them. Because the r-version is basically a derivative from these versions.
But make no mistake – it’s very much helpful to think of them as their own thing.
Which brings us right to the next question.
Are “r-versions” just colloquial, shortened versions of “her-versions”
And this one is a stone cold, steel hard NO!!!
And still, quite a few learners get taught this.
You see, when you try to learn about r-versions online or you ask your teacher about it, you’ll usually get something like this:
“Oh, rausgehen is a shortened version of herausgehen, it’s colloquial and only used in spoken.”
And this is… well… neither helpful, nor thought through.
For two reasons.
Number 1 – “colloquial” is giving a wrong impression
When learners hear “colloquial”, they tend to think “not ideal” because they want to learn “proper German”. Which is a great in general but not here. Because you simply can’t just replace all r-versions with a her-version and expect it to be idiomatic.
It’s NOT!
Like with rausgehen for example:
- Lass uns ein bisschen rausgehen.
This is perfect!
- Lass uns ein bisschen herausgehen.
This is trash.
Seriously… it does NOT sound like high German, it just sounds super strange. Yes, herausgehen does exist, but it simply doesn’t work in this context here. Many r-versions have kind of become a verb for themselves and their her-version sounds out of place or doesn’t cover the full range of meaning (we’ll find out later why that is the case)
You can often shorten a her-version to an r-version but doesn’t always work in reverse. And that’s also because of reason number 2.
Number 2 – Not every r-version even comes from “her-“
Yes, you read that right. NOT every r-version goes back to a her-version.
A great example for that is raufmachen. Raufmachen is a word you’ll need if you for example buy a Cappuccino and you want some cacao-powder on top.
- Können Sie ein bisschen Kakaopulver raufmachen?
If you follow the common narrative, you’d just use heraufmachen here, but that word actually doesn’t exist. Neither Duden, nor Wiktionary or Dict.cc list it.
The reason is that raufmachen is actually technically a short version of daraufmachen or draufmachen, respectively.
And we have the same restrictions here that we had for her-versions. So many dr-versions can be shortened to r-versions, but not always the other way around and sometimes the r-version and the dr-version have different meanings.
Like… draufgehen which can mean to die while raufgehen means to go up and the “non-colloquial counterpart” of which, according to Duden (the subpar website that needs to get its act together), is hinaufgehen.
Are you confused yet?
Good! That means you’re a human being!!
Hold on to that :)!
All that matters from this last segment is that you can see that this idea that r-versions are “just a colloquial form of her-versions” is… well… uninformed nonsense.
Wrap up
I believe, r-versions deserve to be treated as a legit “thing” and not ignored as they so often are by courses, teachers and textbooks.
They’re an essential piece of everyday conversation because they often carry the most literal, basic meaning that you can imagine for a prefix verb.
And besides r-versions, there are also her-versions, hin-versions and dr-versions. But they don’t always mean the same.
Next time, in part two, we’ll dig a little deeper into the versions and see how and why the came to be and how they all relate to each other and what verbs tend to have which versions.
It’s going to be nerdy, but also very insightful, so stay tuned.
But for today, we’re pretty much done, and I hope this cleared things up a little.
I know this was a bit short for examples, but this overview is meant as a supplement to the articles in the Prefix Verbs Explained series.
As always, if you want to test how much you remember, you can take the little quiz I have prepared.
And of course, if have any questions or suggestions just leave me a comment.
I hope you liked it und bis zum nächsten Mal :)
Find part two here:
Further reading:
- Thinking about Prefix Verbs
(a three part series that looks at prefixes and prefix verbs as a general concept, how the German ones came to be and how the relate to English) - Prefix Verbs Explained – My Archive
“… which DO NEVER have…”
this is 100% wrong (as mentioned below) but I can’t see why!
“which NEVER have” and “which DON’T EVER have” and “which DO NOT EVER have” are all fine.
Maybe English is just as difficult as German, after all
“In my series prefix verbs explained, I always mention the r-version, and it’ll also play a role in the card game and app I am working on. So… lots to come.“
App? Sir, are you working on an App that teaches German?
I wish, but that’s a bit too big for me right now as a lone wolf.
What this refers to is my card game about prefix verbs and the prefix verb dictionary:
https://germanprefixes.com/ (the dictionary)
https://www.learnprefixverbs.com/ (the game + project)
The plan was to make the dictionary into a proper app, but the person I was working with is not really doing anything anymore, so it’s been just me now for almost a year doing dev work and my main focus was supposed to be content.
Understandable. And I can relate to that.
Thanks for the links
Great article! One small suggestion :
“for themselves” could be better expressed as “of their own” or “independent”.
Could no r-version for “ab” be because the prefixes that do have an r-version indicate the idea of toward something instead of away?
Nice theory, but no, the prefix “aus” for example isn’t necessarily toward something
With ab-verbs, the “her-” was just never shortened that way – herabschauen, hinabschauen… these do exist.
Not sure what I wrote in the article, actually. I hope I made that clear that ONLY the r-version doesn’t exist but the hin- and her-versions do, albeit not common.
R-version ASMR: this episode of Die Maus where they explain and show over and over why the latch of a doorknob does not move the doorknob, although the doorknob moves the latch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4-xbX89AFg
LOL… kid still a bit shaky with the verbs. The r-versions are on point, but at some point the girl says “wenn man die Klinge reindrückt”, which is of course absolute nonsense and had me incredibly confused.
Kidding of course. But she did mean “runterdrückt” and the reporter later says it correctly.
Also… flawless conditional by the girl.
– Wenn man das wollen würde, dann müsste man das machen.
Great video!!
I think Sendung mit der Maus is PERFECT content for learners, because they speak simply, but naturally and they have interesting topics you never knew you wanted to know.
You know, I wondered about that! I watched various portions of that video A LOT at various speeds and I think what the girl is saying is actually “wenn man die Klinke {confused mumble}drückt…” like she couldn’t grab a specific preposition in time. It’s more apparent at .75 speed. On the other hand that could just be an overly developed fan theory, LOL.
It really is such a great program. I’m sort of obsessed. So calm and clear and interesting, and a soothing lack of that loud commercial sense that’s all over American media. I’m so glad I can finally understand it without much strain.
Nah, that’s not lore. She does “commit” to r-versions and doesn’t try to mumble her way around them.
Unless I really missed an instance. If you have a time code, I’ll give it a second listen, but I was pretty sure the ones I heard were unambiguous.
I’ve read the masterpiece before but i’m back here because idk where to make this question but here so there:
When is the now officially named ‘r-version’ unnecessary?
Like, sometimes i be making examples using the r-version on Google Translator or Chatgpt to see if they right, but sometimes they just be changing it to a normal version of the verb
Like when i tried to use Rausfallen in the past form and Chatty (that works really hard) just changed it to ‘Gefallen’
I hope you get what i’m saying here :p
I need some examples to answer that!
Also, Chatty absolutely does not understand anything about anything, and it’s not reliable for these kinds of things.
Let’s see
-I tried to make a sentence using ‘reinpassen’ on Google Translator
‘Da das Zimmer voll ist, passt der Bett nicht mehr rein’
(IDK if that’s idiomatic in german)
And when i flip the languages, it just turns into the normal ‘Passt’, making it seems like it is just something to expecify and it’s not really necessary, but something felt shaddy and that’s why i’m here
-Another one was with ‘rausfallen’
‘Mein Handy ist aus meiner Tasche rausgefallen’
Interesting enough, if i remove where it fell from, the Translator changes it to the said longer version ‘herausfallen’ which i guess would be the same in this context, whatever
Is the translator stupid or am i doing something wrong?
The thing is that i don’t really have a way to confirm if a sentence is right without using those things.
– Da das Zimmer voll ist, passt das Bett nicht rein.
This is perfect and how a German would say it. You can skip “rein”, but then it’s less specific and could also mean it doesn’t “match” the room. Having a directionality there (rein, hin) is much better.
– Mein Handy ist aus der Tasche (raus)gefallen.
Here, we already have a direction – aus der Tasche. So here, the “raus” is really not adding anything. People might still use it out of habit or as a subconscious stressing of the direction, but it’s not the same as the first example, because there, directionality is missing.
If you take out the “Tasche”, then you do need “raus”. “heraus” is a faulty attempt at sounding “proper”.
I think DeepL does fairly well with this stuff, ChatGPT does too, but if they were to actually “get it” I would be really surprised.
In your last example about a friend wanting to come in, the answer is, du kannst reinkommen. When I lived in Germany and someone knocked on the door, the response I always heard was, Komm herein, or just herein. Is this an exception?
Great observation!!
That’s done because “rein” by itself would sound truncated, as a single syllable. The “he(r)” is unstressed and gives a nice flow to the whole 2 syllable thing.
As for “komm herein”… were you living in the South somewhere?
Does that help?
I was living in Mönchengladbach and then later in Leipzig
This may have been asked before but is there any meaningful difference between using a preposition and the accusative case to specify motion vs a preposition and an r-variant? e.g. in etw gehen vs in etw. reingehen. I hear it more commonly in grimm stories.
Just to make sure, you’re still using the Accusative case even if there’s an r-variant involved.
The r-variant in these instances is basically “doubling up” the directionality, and it can sound a bit colloquial or childish, but it also works well for “chant” like writing.
Check out this article, there’s some more about this in there :)
https://yourdailygerman.com/da-words-apart-spoken-german/
Thank you very much. This was very helpful. There really should be more information about this topic in learning material
I 1000% agree. It’s an absolute blind spot in the “main stream learning” field.
What would be the long formal version of the slur word “Raus !!” ?
“Hinaus!”
It’s not a “slur” though, it’s just “normal everyday speech”.
Hey there. Came back to this again for a second helping of “r” – luckily this was the main topic not too long ago. However, I think this article and the Part 2 (3?) needs to show up in the ‘various topics’ Grammar section of the website with the Da – and Wo – words. Typing R-words into the search field didn’t do it, and chasing one of the many runterxxxxx words in the dictionary with links to a more in depth look also didn’t take me here.
I go back to the Grammar area and re-re-read articles often. I would imagine that others do as well. Sometimes you just need to know the absolute basics, so you get what you need and leave, but other times you have a rainy day (VERY uncommon in South Texas) and you want to spend time refreshing what you think you know about the language. Just my 2 cents.
You’re 100% correct! I’m really bad with adding new articles to the archives, actually.
In the dictionary, you can find it under “r-version”, but I have added “r-words” as a possible term, too now. I’ll also add it to the archive now.
Thanks for the nudge, this would probably have taken me months to even realize otherwise :D
having subscribed to the Newsretter the annoying subscrbe screen continues to appear, it occupies far too much screen space, please could you remedy this please
I have it on my to do list to make it smaller, but it only goes away for members.
Hi, I just want to say a big THANK YOU for all of the people who paid a little extra, so people who can’t afford the subscription are enabled to learn german with this website for free. I received that possibility and I am very very VERY grateful. I am not able to work right now and in my home there are also some “parental-kind-of” issues when it comes to money. So again, I am very grateful for being able to study here for free for a whole year!
Krzysztof
Thank you so much for this r-version series. This is one of my main german-learning doubts.
I am stuck behind a paywall because I have supposedly already seen two posts this week… But I have opened one post of yours in my life. It’s quite discouraging.
Have you tried copy pasting the link at the bottom of the newsletter? That usually fixes this issue.
I should thank you, for all the supporters out there. With the support of yours, I am able to become a premium member and learn German. Thank you again to Emanuel for this helpful website. Viel Spaß beim Lernen alle!
“I mean, German can sound shitty but not THIS shitty.”
Here I laughed hard… but it made me think about all the slavic languages which manage to have words with nice sequences of consonants
If I say “Ich gehe aus”, what am I saying?
Usually “I’m going out (to a restaurant/bar/theatre etc)”, I believe: that is, you’re “going out *to*” somewhere. But you can also “gehe mit jemandem aus”, as in “dating/going_out with”.
Yeah, that’s pretty much it.
I have to add though that it’s getting more and more old fashion.
To me, “Ich gehe aus” sounds like a rich person is going to the opera or theater or a fancy dinner.
I NEVER say “ausgehen” at all.
The more common most generic term for Gen x and younger is “weggehen”.
I would recommend not using “ausgehen”. The chances that it’s unidiomatic are just too high.
Aah, thanks a lot, that’s good to know. A certain language-learning game whose name I dare not speak still throws “ausgehen” into the mix. For example, with new year’s resolutions: “Ich werde weniger ausgehen und mehr sparen” as “I will go out less and save more money”. On the slightly brighter side of things, DeepL happily coughs up “Ich werde weniger weggehen und mehr sparen” when fed that English starter, but offers the “ausgehen” version as an alternative.
That’s one phrasing where it sounds “less” outdated, but it still sounds old school to me.
I’m sure this little language-learning game is a small start-up that’ll fix these mistakes once it gets seed funding.
Yes, yes, they’ll be working on working on working on working on it right now. I can actually hear the committees being formed as I type this comment. All of this is going to operate in glorious harmony with those armies of highly educated speakers of English and German pumping out unbeatable sentences such as “Der Kaiserin hat ständig die Blumen im Garten kritisiert” (no, I’m not joking: “Der Kaiserin”) and “This spiders are venomous” as a translation for “Diese Spinnen sind giftig”. (Ef)fluency in every direction, at all times.
Godspeed, little startup!!
The road to IPO are pave with good intentions.
Ha, that’s funny… following what Emanuel said above..
Ich werde weniger ausgehen und mehr sparen -> I’ll stop spending the little money I have on operas and fancy dinners and save something
Thanks… I’m sure I already dropped an “ich gehe aus” in the past meaning weggehen
Actually… I think I said “gemma aus?”
Maybe in Austria that’s idiomatic. I don’t know much about their weird Austrian language :D
Don’t ask me, I’m Italian :D
I quickly adopted the “gemma” semantics but I’m not sure if I ever heard a native say “gemma aus”
For sure they say “gemma trinken?” or “saufma?”
What definitely does exist is:
– Gemma ‘naus.
Which means “Let’s go outside.”
That’s the r-version of the South basically. I’ve covered all that in part 2 :).
I was talking to a couple of colleagues of mine today – both are around 18-20- neither of them had ever heard of weggehen and both use ausgehen. Are you sure ausgehen is so unidiomatic?
Hmmm… to me it is. So they say “ausgehen” when they mean going to party on the weekend?
yeah.. i’ll ask a few more people about this cus i’m curious now….
Defo let me know how it went!!
ok so i asked another collegue who a bit older (late 20s i guess) and more in the berlin club scene and he confirmed what you said basically, that lots of people use weggehen and that ausgehen sounds much more elegant. The way he explained it it was like “weg” from reality…
I think that explanation is more of a retroactive fit onto the word “weg” :).
I used “weggehen” way before Keta and MDMA was even a thing people would regularly take here.
the ole “backronym”.. and….you must have be using the term a while then…
actually thats not a backronym.. but its similar
Well, since the mid 90s :). “ausgehen” already sounded old school then.
Interesting though, that the “youngins” seem to bring it back. They also listen to 90s techno, which is quite disappointing. They’re supposed to listen to music that SHOCKS me and makes me go like “WTF is this, this is not music.” but no… they just listen to the same stuff we used to listen to when we were teens. So boring.
Well, yeah. The state of techno is really a topic I could talk about for hours tbh. I feel like club music really fulfilled its potential the last decade and is so exciting but i don’t see that reflected in what seems to be popular.
Out of interest have you read “Der Klang der Familie” btw? I read the english translation first but have pretty much finished re reading it in german.
No, I haven’t. I don’t reach much tbh (as in “not at all”).
I have listened to Techno since 1994, and it’s very close to my heart. And already toward the end of the 90s I was hating on new stuff coming out and all that Euro-Dance trash that was using “my music”.
Then, in the early 2000s, “electro” became a catch-all term for techno and house used by all the people who didn’t really know the genres, but started going there because the parties were simply better than DnB or Hip Hop parties.
Like… so many friends of mine who did not like “electro” at first started going to parties.
I don’t think anything has changed since then, in terms of music. Ever since Ableton Live (the software) came out, that was when we reached a plateau.
I’m curious to see where it goes, but I do see a LOT of people at parties in Kater or Sisy who do NOT really understand house or techno. Like… it doesn’t really bring them joy just to listen to it. That’s why they’re snorting so much on the toilet.
So, you would recommend saying “Ich gehe weg” instead?
“Ich gehe feiern” is what I usually use nowadays, but weg also works.
Ah, makes sense. I always think “Ich gehe weg” means “I am going away (from here)” but not necessarily for anything special. In fact almost the opposite :)
Thank you for giving valuable insights into the most confusing R-version for a german learner
Never found any explanation in any book so far.
On my lunchbreak i just happened to read the word “rin” – is this a colloquial shortening of “drin” or a berlinisch spelling of of “rein” (there was some other berlinisch in the text) ?
The latter. “rin” is Berlin/Brandeburg Dialect for “rein”.
That’s actually important because “drin” is stationary while “rein” is directional.
To a Berliner “rin” feels zero like “drin”.
cool, thanks! Makes total sense it would be that now you say it…
Hallo lieber Emmanuel,
Ich danke dir schon, für diesen wertvollen Artikel .
Ich Frage mich dennoch wie ein kleines deutsches Kind, sagmal in 5 er Klasse kann diesen zweien Begriffe ( herunter/ runter , hinauf/ rauf )zu verstehen ohne stört zu sein.
Weil verstehe ich dies als zwei Ebene, öffentliches versus umgangliches ( oder schriftliches v.sprachliches ) . Oder ?
Im Voraus vielen Dank .
Kinder lernen als erstes die “r-versions”, denn das ist, was sie im Alltag hören.
Das ist sehr früh schon fertig. Dreijährige machen schon einen Unterschied zwischen “ausgehen” und “rausgehen”.
Die anderen Versionen (“heraus-“, “hinaus-“) kommen dann später dazu, wenn man anfängt zu lesen.
Die sind dann sozusagen “Varianten” von was man schon kennt. Auch deshalb macht es Sinn, die r-versions als das Zentrum zu sehen, denn Kinder lernen es auch so.
Herzlichen Dank.
Rab doesn’t exist because it means God in Punjabi.
Ignore this pseudophilosphical comment.
So about raufmachen. I’m grateful for this article. I often have trouble speaking basic sentences in german because I’ve no idea which verb fits. In case of this verb, is there a reason it’s not there in dict.cc? Nor the full Version daraufmachen. And I know I shouldn’t literally translate but I’m still curious why isn’t there a form of the word put to be used in this situation and instead there’s do. Do some cocoa on the top. Translator btw says steuern which sounds fancy. My professor insists on us using high academic german but I don’t want to in real life situations. What’s the point of discussion Kant and stuff if I can’t order coffee in German (Well not that I can do that in languages I’m fluent in ).
Do consider making a list of basic verbs that you guys can’t do without. Und danke sehr für noch einen großartigen Artikel!
I think dict.cc as a community driven dictionary (as far as I know) will ultimately be influenced by the Duden, because when people argue about what to include and what not, they will use Duden as a reference to be like “See! Seeeeee! It’s not in there.”.
This is pure speculation on my part though. I don’t know how dict.cc actually works.
Why “daraufmachen” isn’t in there… no clue. I found that very weird, also they the offer “draufmachen” only as part of a couple of phrases.
I also checked leo.org now, and they list neither “raufmachen” nor “draufmachen” nor “daraufmachen”.
Pons at least lists “draufmachen”.
But overall, this is shocking! I need to get going with my app about this. There’s clearly a gap.
As for your question about “put”… we have stellen and legen and setzen, but none of them fit for chili on a pizza or cacao powder on a latte. So we use the “generic” machen.
Yes, “streuen” would be what you do with specifically spices or powder, but for oil you’d then need “träufeln”.
And both sound like you’re talking to a high dining chef. I doubt your professor would use these in daily life at the coffee shop.
Danke! Kannst du mir auch sagen ob dieses Verb trennbar ist oder nicht?
All the versions, r-version, dr-version, her-version and hin-version are ALWAYS separable, no exceptions :)
I wonder if in some ways could be considered a sort of mood of the verbs…
So I did a quick check on Wikipedia and there it defines “mood” as being away to express the speakers attitude toward the action.
Based on that, I don’t think the r-versions are a mood.
Also, because they do take moods. Like.. they can be used in indicative, conditional and so on and I am not sure if verbs can be in two moods at the same time.
Yeah, i figured it wouldn’t be in a strictly formal sense but it started a whole train of thought about how grammatical / linguistic catorgories are defined.