Talk:German/Grammar

Untitled
I think the original author used a somewhat unorthodox sequence of persons and cases. The more common one is:

1st person singular ich 2nd person singular du 3rd person singular  er, sie, es, Sie 1st person plural   wir 2nd person plural   ihr 3rd person plural   sie, Sie


 * There is one mistake above: "Sie" is 2nd person: in Singular it is the polite form of "du", and in plural of "ihr".

1. Nominative der Mann 2. Genitive   des Mannes 3. Dativ      dem Mann 4. Accusative den Mann

Perhaps the corresponding chapters should be changed accordingly? (CKWG)


 * Yes, I did. Feel free to change it to your liking.  I don't know why either the cases or the pronouns are in an "orthodox" order, but there seems to be a typical order for some reason...

---

This seems a bit redundant. Why not just contribute to the existing books? I'll give you an example. Your article on future tense is good. Although there is yet no lesson on that subject in Level I, II, or III, we could easily prepare one using your input as the basis for it. It takes a long time to develop a "complete" lesson, but you have a good start there already. I do not think we need to plan completely out where it must fall (that is, exactly what chapter it needs to be). We simply stick it in as a chapter of, say Level II, then later, move it (actually, change the chapter number) as it becomes obvious that other lessons should proceed or follow it. When you asked about a "grammar" book, I assumed you were going to do just grammar rules. Level III is intended to concentrate more on grammar, which might suit you fine. It appears you would be a good contributor to advancing the book we have already started. What do you say? - Marshman 04:13, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Then, in my eyes, I see two options. Collecting all of the Grammar notes already written and then putting them in this grammar section (perhaps summarising some areas) and also using the grammar section to write grammar help that has not found a home inside one of the lessons.
 * This seems to be what you are presently doing, although for some grammar concepts you are ahead of the "homes". - Marshman
 * OR


 * Simple grammar reference with only the most summarised and basic information and keep the explanations of grammar in the lessons (perhaps links back and forth between the lessons and the notes). --Boit 23:06, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * This was basically the idea for the appendices to the book: basic grammar rules, mostly in tables.


 * If you feel comfortable proceeding with what you are presently preparing, then I'd say continue on. But we should agree that as your lessons become redundant (or actualy, become useful to incorporate into the existing book), we simply move them (or rename the module) into the existing German book.  For example, your lesson on the alphabet is really not much  different from what exists in the first appendix. So that should simply be merged. Other stuff you are or will prepare may be advanced relative to where the book is now, and we can worry about merging it all later. Does this approach make sense? - Marshman 05:31, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

--

I think there should be a topic about "Modalität" (Indikativ, Konjunktiv I, Kunjunktiv II, Imperativ). Here some information if you don't know what I mean:

Indikativ: normal form (the here teached forms). No special mode. Konjunktiv I: Form for the German "reporting speach". There's no other use. Konjunktiv II: Form der Möglichkeit (form of posibility). Imperativ: Form for commands / Befehlsform.

Beispiele:

Indikativ: Er geht aus dem Haus.

Konjunktiv I: Er sagte, er gehe aus dem Haus. ODER Er sagte, er würde aus dem Haus gehen (Mündlich öfter genutzt, aber eigentlich nur erlaubt, wenn die Indikativform sich nicht vom Konjunktuv I unterscheidet.). (Präsens-Stamm + Personalendung).

Konjunktiv II: Wenn du aus dem Haus gingest, wäre ich glücklicher. ODER Wenn du aus dem Haus gehen würdest, wäre ich glücklicher. (Präteritumstamm + Personalendung).

Imperativ: Geh aus dem Haus! (Präsensstamm und selten + "e").

Personalendungen (Konjunktiv I und II):

1. Sg. e 2. Sg. est 3. Sg. e 1. Pl. en 2. Pl. et 3. Pl. en

Bei der würden-Methode wird der Konjunktiv von werden genommen und danach der Imfinitiv des Verbs genommen.

It would be nice if someone writes a topic about that. And for the adjectives: A topic about comparison (Steigerung) is missing.

Prepositions - sentencte unusual
Actually good work now, but there is a little thing (→ Preopsitions) that I as a native would on no way say so:

Nach dem Pfarrer sei Gott gut. Dem Pfarrer nach sei Gott gut.

'Nach' is very unusual at this point. It could be missunderstoud as (Someone said that) after the priest (died), god will be good. -- at least the first version. It is better to use laut:

Laut Pfarrer ist Gott gut.

Also Konjunktiv I is not very common there. One example for Konjunktiv I:

The priest said that good is good. Der Pfarrer sagte, Gott sei gut (/ dass Gott gut sei).

And at last an example for a usage of nach:

Nach Meier gibt es für ein solches Verhalten keinen Grund. (let Meier be the family name of a famous, historical person) According to Meier, there is no reason for such a behavior.

But also there, laut would at no way be uncommon (so if you are not sure, use laut). I don't know how you think about this, but I as an English learning German learn most of all grammar better when I have some examples, not with the rules (But also, I don't know how one can use this for learning German, because of its strict grammar). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.172.232.3 (discuss • contribs) 23:16, 18 February 2009


 * Thanks for your interest in the book! Unfortunately, as the page edit history shows, there hasn't really been much activity on this book since 2006. Please feel free to be bold and update it to imrove this module. That's what makes the wiki great. :-D --Swift (talk) 16:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a good objection, but it would be written as follows:

Laut dem Pfarrer sei Gott gut.
 * MrPalpatine 21:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)