Example of a relative pronounMeine Kinder haben (considering sie as pronoun)/ habt(considering ihr as pronoun) hungrigDifference Between “Sich” and “Man” in Example ProvidedDifference between “an” and “auf” in the example provided
What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?
A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?
Need help identifying/translating a plaque in Tangier, Morocco
Where to refill my bottle in India?
Copycat chess is back
A Journey Through Space and Time
What is the meaning of "of trouble" in the following sentence?
Chess with symmetric move-square
Should I join an office cleaning event for free?
Are tax years 2016 & 2017 back taxes deductible for tax year 2018?
Why don't electron-positron collisions release infinite energy?
Do airline pilots ever risk not hearing communication directed to them specifically, from traffic controllers?
Is it possible to make sharp wind that can cut stuff from afar?
Closed subgroups of abelian groups
How do I create uniquely male characters?
My colleague's body is amazing
What are these boxed doors outside store fronts in New York?
Infinite past with a beginning?
Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?
Why Is Death Allowed In the Matrix?
Simulate Bitwise Cyclic Tag
Can I interfere when another PC is about to be attacked?
How can the DM most effectively choose 1 out of an odd number of players to be targeted by an attack or effect?
Can town administrative "code" overule state laws like those forbidding trespassing?
Example of a relative pronoun
Meine Kinder haben (considering sie as pronoun)/ habt(considering ihr as pronoun) hungrigDifference Between “Sich” and “Man” in Example ProvidedDifference between “an” and “auf” in the example provided
The University of Michigan gives this sentence on their page about relative pronouns:
"Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meinen kleinen Hund, der mich immer wütend macht."
The page said the "der" referred back to "meinem kleinen Hund" but since "Jack Nicholson" is in the nominative position of this sentence ("meinen kleinen Hund" is in the accusative), why wouldn't the "der" refer back to Nicholson?
https://resources.german.lsa.umich.edu/grammatik/relative/#WerWoWas
standard-german
add a comment |
The University of Michigan gives this sentence on their page about relative pronouns:
"Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meinen kleinen Hund, der mich immer wütend macht."
The page said the "der" referred back to "meinem kleinen Hund" but since "Jack Nicholson" is in the nominative position of this sentence ("meinen kleinen Hund" is in the accusative), why wouldn't the "der" refer back to Nicholson?
https://resources.german.lsa.umich.edu/grammatik/relative/#WerWoWas
standard-german
1
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago
add a comment |
The University of Michigan gives this sentence on their page about relative pronouns:
"Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meinen kleinen Hund, der mich immer wütend macht."
The page said the "der" referred back to "meinem kleinen Hund" but since "Jack Nicholson" is in the nominative position of this sentence ("meinen kleinen Hund" is in the accusative), why wouldn't the "der" refer back to Nicholson?
https://resources.german.lsa.umich.edu/grammatik/relative/#WerWoWas
standard-german
The University of Michigan gives this sentence on their page about relative pronouns:
"Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meinen kleinen Hund, der mich immer wütend macht."
The page said the "der" referred back to "meinem kleinen Hund" but since "Jack Nicholson" is in the nominative position of this sentence ("meinen kleinen Hund" is in the accusative), why wouldn't the "der" refer back to Nicholson?
https://resources.german.lsa.umich.edu/grammatik/relative/#WerWoWas
standard-german
standard-german
asked 12 hours ago
AaronAaron
57715
57715
1
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago
1
1
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
To quote a rule from the same page:
The relative clause always comes right after the noun it is describing.
(But note the exception for "dangling verbs".)
It is not enough for a relative pronoun to match the gender of its antecedent. The relative clause it introduces must also be positioned correctly. Now let's look at a slightly different sentence:
*Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meine kleine Katze, der mich immer wütend macht.
After replacing masculine Hund by feminine Katze, the only possible antecedent of the relative clause is Jack Nicholson. Yet because the relative clause is not adjacent to its antecedent, the sentence is ungrammatical.
Finally, note that the case of the relative pronoun is completely independent of the case of its antecedent. They occur in different sentences, after all!
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], den (Acc.) ich liebe?
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde?
Observe how the case of the relative pronoun is determined by the verb in the subordinate clause (lieben + accusative in the first four examples, schulden + dative in the others). I took these examples from the section How to choose the correct relative pronoun on this page with supplementary information.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "253"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgerman.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f50543%2fexample-of-a-relative-pronoun%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
To quote a rule from the same page:
The relative clause always comes right after the noun it is describing.
(But note the exception for "dangling verbs".)
It is not enough for a relative pronoun to match the gender of its antecedent. The relative clause it introduces must also be positioned correctly. Now let's look at a slightly different sentence:
*Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meine kleine Katze, der mich immer wütend macht.
After replacing masculine Hund by feminine Katze, the only possible antecedent of the relative clause is Jack Nicholson. Yet because the relative clause is not adjacent to its antecedent, the sentence is ungrammatical.
Finally, note that the case of the relative pronoun is completely independent of the case of its antecedent. They occur in different sentences, after all!
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], den (Acc.) ich liebe?
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde?
Observe how the case of the relative pronoun is determined by the verb in the subordinate clause (lieben + accusative in the first four examples, schulden + dative in the others). I took these examples from the section How to choose the correct relative pronoun on this page with supplementary information.
add a comment |
To quote a rule from the same page:
The relative clause always comes right after the noun it is describing.
(But note the exception for "dangling verbs".)
It is not enough for a relative pronoun to match the gender of its antecedent. The relative clause it introduces must also be positioned correctly. Now let's look at a slightly different sentence:
*Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meine kleine Katze, der mich immer wütend macht.
After replacing masculine Hund by feminine Katze, the only possible antecedent of the relative clause is Jack Nicholson. Yet because the relative clause is not adjacent to its antecedent, the sentence is ungrammatical.
Finally, note that the case of the relative pronoun is completely independent of the case of its antecedent. They occur in different sentences, after all!
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], den (Acc.) ich liebe?
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde?
Observe how the case of the relative pronoun is determined by the verb in the subordinate clause (lieben + accusative in the first four examples, schulden + dative in the others). I took these examples from the section How to choose the correct relative pronoun on this page with supplementary information.
add a comment |
To quote a rule from the same page:
The relative clause always comes right after the noun it is describing.
(But note the exception for "dangling verbs".)
It is not enough for a relative pronoun to match the gender of its antecedent. The relative clause it introduces must also be positioned correctly. Now let's look at a slightly different sentence:
*Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meine kleine Katze, der mich immer wütend macht.
After replacing masculine Hund by feminine Katze, the only possible antecedent of the relative clause is Jack Nicholson. Yet because the relative clause is not adjacent to its antecedent, the sentence is ungrammatical.
Finally, note that the case of the relative pronoun is completely independent of the case of its antecedent. They occur in different sentences, after all!
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], den (Acc.) ich liebe?
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde?
Observe how the case of the relative pronoun is determined by the verb in the subordinate clause (lieben + accusative in the first four examples, schulden + dative in the others). I took these examples from the section How to choose the correct relative pronoun on this page with supplementary information.
To quote a rule from the same page:
The relative clause always comes right after the noun it is describing.
(But note the exception for "dangling verbs".)
It is not enough for a relative pronoun to match the gender of its antecedent. The relative clause it introduces must also be positioned correctly. Now let's look at a slightly different sentence:
*Jeden Morgen tritt Jack Nicholson meine kleine Katze, der mich immer wütend macht.
After replacing masculine Hund by feminine Katze, the only possible antecedent of the relative clause is Jack Nicholson. Yet because the relative clause is not adjacent to its antecedent, the sentence is ungrammatical.
Finally, note that the case of the relative pronoun is completely independent of the case of its antecedent. They occur in different sentences, after all!
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], den (Acc.) ich liebe.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], den (Acc.) ich liebe?
Das ist der Laden [Nom.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir gehen in den Laden [Acc.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wir sind in dem Laden [Dat.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde.
Wer ist der Besitzer des Ladens [Gen.], dem (Dat.) ich €20.000 schulde?
Observe how the case of the relative pronoun is determined by the verb in the subordinate clause (lieben + accusative in the first four examples, schulden + dative in the others). I took these examples from the section How to choose the correct relative pronoun on this page with supplementary information.
edited 9 hours ago
answered 12 hours ago
David VogtDavid Vogt
4,8131331
4,8131331
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to German Language Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgerman.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f50543%2fexample-of-a-relative-pronoun%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Semantisch ist das sehr merkwürdig. Wenn Dich der Hund wütend macht - wieso trittst Du ihn nicht selbst? Wieso hast Du überhaupt einen Hund, wenn er Dich wütend macht? Zum Glück hast Du die Quelle verlinkt, sonst hätte ich gedacht, dass es ein Übertragungsfehler ist oder ein miserables Lehrbuch (hatten wir auch schon).
– user unknown
7 hours ago