this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2025
12 points (92.9% liked)

Language Learning

562 readers
4 users here now

A community all about learning languages!

Ask / talk about a specific language or language learning in general.

Sopuli's instance rules apply

  1. Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
  2. No racism or other discrimination
  3. No Nazis, QAnon or similar whackos and no endorsement of them
  4. No porn
  5. No ads or spam
  6. No content against Finnish law

Other active Lemmy language communities:

Other communities outside Lemmy:

Community banner & icon credits:

Icon: The book cover of Babel (2022 novel by R. F. Kuang)

Banner: Epic of Gilgamesh tablet (© The Trustees of the British Museum)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
12
[GERMAN] Dativ vs Akkusativ (sopuli.xyz)
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hallo!

So I thought that maybe we have people here who can help me with this:

I'm having a lot of trouble understanding when to use Dativ vs Akkusativ in German. I understand that specific prepositions require specific cases, but in general I often find myself applying the wrong case in a sentence.

In some sentences it is quite clear:

Ich habe den Stift gekauft. (Pen being the direct object that is being bought)

But there are cases like this:

Ich schlafe in meinem auto in meiner pause (I know the order is wrong, but the cases seem to stay as they are even if you change the order)

Here I would have thought that the car is the direct object. I struggle with this a lot and often apply akkusativ case wrongly.

I would appreciate if someone could help me with understanding this better. For example: Why is the car not the direct object in the above example?

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Think in English a bit. Would you sleep a car? Not really, right? The verb is intransitive, you don't need a direct object. And if you really want to use one, you'd say what you slept - a nap, a beauty sleep, etc.

German "schlafen" is the same deal, it requires no direct object. And if you were to force one, you'd end with something like "ich schlafe meinen Schönheitsschlaf" (I sleep my beauty sleep) - note how the accusative is there.

So the role of that "in meinem Auto" (in my car) is something else: it's an optional complement telling you where that action happens. German typically handles this through prepositional phrases (Präpositionalphrase), so the preposition dictates which case you need to use:

  • some ask for the dative; e.g. "mit" (with), "bei" (by), "von" (from)...
  • some ask for accusative; e.g. "für" (for), "gegen" (against), "ohne" (without)...
  • some allow either; e.g. "über" (over), "neben" (near), "in" (in).

When the preposition allows either, typically you use the accusative when the subject is changing locations. For example:

  • ich laufe in den Wald (I run towards the woods; like, I'm running and I reach the woods)
  • ich laufe im [=in+dem] Wald (I run in the woods; like, I'm just jogging there)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

That example about "sleep a car" and the forest running made it crystal clear to me what's going on, thank you!

Also I think intransitive verb is the term I really needed. This helps tremendously.

Thank you for taking time to explain it to me!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Edit: well apparently i dont really understand my own language...

The reason is that the car is not directly related to the action. The preposition "in" just tells you where the sleeping is taking place. You could replace it by others: "Ich schlafe auf/unter/neben meinem Auto." A good comparison would be "I am breaking INTO my car." "Ich breche in mein Auto ein." Here the "in" tells you more than just where its taking place. The car is part of the action.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Ahh! That actually makes a lot of sense now. I've struggled with this sentence for a few days and it was driving me nuts. Thank you so much!

And thanks for the example where to use akkusativ! I really need more examples like that to hammer this into my head.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think the key thing to mention about your accusative example is not that the car is part of the action, but rather that 'in' is describing motion towards/into something.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Hmm, I feel there are some edge cases where it just makes no sense. "Ich breche in DAS Auto ein." vs "Ich breche aus DEM Auto aus." Oh well, at least we have a way to catch foreign spies...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The accusative is used with motion towards, and since aus conveys motion away from the car, I think the dative makes perfect sense

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

But even that has exceptions such as "ich gehe zu DEM auto". So I guess you would have to learn by heart which prepositions go with which case and only in the ambiguous cases (auf,in...) you use the movement idea?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

Yeah, prepositions do complicate matters. The principle of motion towards vs. location/moment away from helps with those prepositions which can take both accusative and dative, but for other prepositions you do just have to learn.