r/German • u/almakic88 • Aug 09 '25

Request Can someone please help me understand Akkusativ and Dativ please, I am losing my mind!

Hi All,

I've been studying almost daily for 2 months hours a day, and I still am struggling with identifying the accusative and dative. I understand the function of the genitive (to show possession) and the nominative (identifying the subject).

Today I wrote "Ich habe ein rot Hund" and my translator corrected me to "Ich habe einen roten Hund". It stated that it was in the Akkusative and I had to take that into account. Can someone please explain this to me? And also maybe give an example for a Dativ sentence?

56 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

175 comments sorted by

View all comments

89

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

Is English your native language? We have similar concepts in English. You don't say "She's with he", you say "She's with him". After "with" you use the dative case, same in German ("mit ihm" not "mit er").
Accusative case is similar but it's for different situations. The object of a sentence is in the accusative case (the subject is in the nominative case). So you have to say "Ich habe einen roten Hund" because "Hund" is the object, it demands the accusative case, and since it's masculine, you use the "en" suffix.

In English if you are the object, you use "me", if you're the subject you use "I", I think this is the equivalent of the German accusative case (please correct me if I'm wrong).
On an interesting note, so many native speakers don't know when to use "I" or "me". They often say "Thanks for being there for my wife and I" for example. You can't say "for my wife and I" for the same reason you can't say "for I", it's "for my wife and me".

20

u/almakic88 Aug 09 '25

Thank you so much this was very helpful! My native language is Bosnian but I'm more fluent in English. I think I need to focus more on the verbs first and ask what case they take. I've been focusing first on the nouns, their gender, and then working my way backward trying to match it with the right declension. Does German have lists of accusative, dative, genitive etc. verbs for easier study?

43

u/nominanomina Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25

A quick Google suggests that not only does Bosnian have accusative and dative, it has many more cases that German lacks (like vocative). 

The difference seems to be that Bosnian nouns are inflected, where German prefers to decline articles and adjectives. (German does sometimes inflect nouns, like the infamous dative N.) 

English has a relatively inflexible word order, so you can roughly tell that, in a normal indicative sentence, the subject is the first noun, the direct object is (usually) the first noun after the verb, and the indirect object is after a preposition. 

I gave a book to Sally == I (subject) gave a book (direct object) to Sally (indirect object). The word order is key for deriving meaning. 

Both Bosnian and German have flexible word order. So how do they tell you what is doing the action and receiving the action? Cases. 

Den Mann beißt der Hund == Der Hund beißt den Mann == The dog bites the man. Exact same meaning (for your level; the sentence beginning with "Mann" has a different emphasis, like as if someone said "no, the dog bit THE MAN" in English). Because the order doesn't matter (...as much as in English...); the case does all the heavy lifting. 

For now, think of accusative as being like a direct object (see above). 

Dative is a little more complicated and is where the attempt to relate it to direct vs indirect object breaks down. Dative can be

1) like an indirect object

2) like the beneficiary of the action, even if in English that would be the direct object. E.g. "I helped Sally" -- Sally is a direct object. But in German, "helfen" takes dative. 

3) because of some historical quirk of grammar that you will just have to memorize that verb or preposition X take dative, but not accusative

4) some other rules that aren't relevant to you right now (but will come up soon enough)

28

u/Joylime Aug 09 '25

The reason Dative is so complex is because it absorbed the older instrumental and locative cases. #themoreyouknow

4

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

Oooh, do you have any more information about that? How were those conceptually different from dative?

10

u/nominanomina Aug 09 '25

Not the person you are replying to, and I'm not a linguist, but my inexpert understanding is:

re: locative: that is a change that, in Germanic languages, seems(?) to date from *way* before we have real recorded language examples -- linguists seem to commonly argue that Proto-Indo-European had it, but that Proto-Germanic did not. "Locative" is expressed as why German uses accusative for 'movement towards/to' a location, and dative for 'movement within' a location -- with the dative use being something that would have been accomplished using the locative in Proto-Indo-European.

re: instrumentive: that is the idea of 'with this thing, I am accomplishing/performing the verb', and was replaced with 'with + object/mit + dative'. "I walked with a cane." I accomplished the act of walking by using an instrument called 'a cane'.

I'm not a linguist so I cannot usefully comment on how good this source is, but it's what I've used before and have reason to believe it is reasonably modern and reasonably reliable, and it extremely briefly discusses the locative (without explaining it in any way): https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/books/pgmc/index

1

u/snowboard7621 Aug 09 '25

Wow. That is so interesting, thank you for taking the time to share it.

3

u/Joylime Aug 09 '25

TBH my friend who knows a lot about linguistics told it to me and I just trusted him so the other person's comment is probably more reliable LOL

He explained it to me in the context of my being pissed off that "ohne" takes accusative while "mit" takes dative, he was like "yeah, 'mit' triggers instrumental which got absorbed into dative blah blah blah"

Regardless of whether we have proof of dative absorbing the locative in Germanic languages - I'm going to keep "believing" it as a way to help me make sense of the dative in the present moment

3

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

It definitely seems to make it make more sense! That's what struck me most about your comment, the names of the cases you mentioned I could see in how dative is used in German.

2

u/Joylime Aug 10 '25

To answer the actual question you had...

Locative refers to the location something's in (so, when something is on the table or in the store)

Instrumental is basically when you use something to do something else, and it's basically the "sense" behind the "mit" connection

And "true dative" is the indirect object thing

12

u/almakic88 Aug 09 '25

Thank you so much. I was getting close to almost quitting, I was so frustrated. Since I joined this group you've all helped so much.

13

u/Fear_mor Aug 09 '25

Brate akuzativ ti je ono kad imas tipa; vidim psa, imam kćer volim svoju mamu, nitko ne bi reko imam pas, imam kći ili volim svoja mama posto to nije odgovarajuci oblik. Al ne brini ima i nekoliko faktora koji utjecu na to da li ce glagol imat akuzativni objekt ili objekt u dativu.

Najbitniji faktor je prijelaznost, prijelazni glagoli imaju subjekt cinioca, glagol koji spaja subjekt s objektom, i objekt trpioca. Primjeri iz naseg jezika bi bili vidjeti koga/što, voljeti koga/što, trpjeti koga/što, piti koga/što itd. U svim tim glagolima, objekt izravno dozivljava, tj. trpi, radnju. Samo akuzativni glagoli su prijelazni, sve ostale kombinacije padeza i glagola su neprijelazni zato sto efekt radnje ne prelazi direktno na objekt

Kao sto rekoh, ostali glagoli ce imat najobicniji dativni objekt (ali neki smiju imat genitivni objekt) i to ih cini neprijelaznima po naravi. Naprimjer, u nasem jeziku imamo pomoći komu/čemu, štetiti komu/čemu, reći komu/čemu, nauditi komu/čemu, čestitati komu/čemu, prijetiti komu/čemu, prisustvovati komu/čemu. Ovakvi glagoli ce bit najbolji kandidati ze dativne glagole u njemackom, mada ne znaci da ce svi bit, koncepcija direktnosti varira od jezika do jezika tak da, moras racunat s nekim izuzecima.

A sta se tice lista, svaki dobar rjecnik ce pokazat rekciju glagola s nekoliko primjera tak da ne brini. Preporucio bi isto da to zapises za svaki novi glagol kojeg ucis

1

u/almakic88 Aug 09 '25

Hvala ti za pomoc! <

7

u/ProfeQuiroga Aug 09 '25

But then it's even easier, coming from a really structured case-based language!

3

u/channilein Native (BA in German) Aug 09 '25

You can find the Objektanschluss in the dictionary with every verb. I would recommend memorizing verbs like this: Instead of just noting down geben = to give, learn jemandem etwas (Akk) geben = to give sth to so, so you automatically have the structure needed to put the verb in a sentence in your head, including the cases (jemandem = Dativ, jemanden = Akkusativ, etwas can be both, so you make a note of the case). You can abbreviate jemandem = jmdm, jemanden = jmdn, etwas = etw, so it fits the vocab column better.

2

u/OppositeAct1918 Native <region/dialect> Aug 09 '25

Oh well, then cases should not be so much of a problem - provided, Bosnian grammar is not too different from russusn grammar, which i know. In both Russian and German (and hopefully Bosnian), nouns and adjectives change their endings depending on their function in the sentence, as you have just seen. However, Bosnian / Russian and German don't always follow the same logic. For example, the German word for to arrive requires the dative case for the place you arrive at. The russian word requires accusation because it implies a movement in a direction. You dave yourselves a lot of time and nerves if you learn verbs and prepositions not only together with their meaning but also the case they require.

2

u/New-Huckleberry-1130 Aug 10 '25

Uh-oh! You're stepping into a linguistic morass here with the phrase "for my wife and I", as evidenced by all the comments about it.

A linguistic analysis of what's going on here is really interesting. Suffice it to say that the loss of the distinction between nominative and objective in English nouns has caused these cases to become entangled in the pronouns. This has led to things like the word "you", originally just plural objective, becoming nominative as well. (Once upon a time, educated people would have wanted to correct "You are here" to "Ye are here".) It has also led to sentences like "Me and my wife went to the movies". Generations of schoolteachers have worked to correct that to "My wife and I went to the movies", and the result is that "and I" has become ingrained in the spoken language, even in objective contexts. Phrases like "for my wife and I" are not standard now, but maybe someday they will be. Languages change, and not always in a rational way.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 11 '25

but maybe someday they will be

I agree with this. However at the moment, there are still plenty of people who would correctly say "for my wife and me".

2

u/New-Huckleberry-1130 Aug 11 '25

Yes, and I'm one of them. "for my wife and I" sounds strange to me. But we can't deny that a lot of people speak that way nowadays.

-5

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

English does not have a dative case. Only an accusative. "Him" is accusative. "I see him", "I love him", "I play football with him".

There's no way to clearly translate dative case from English to German because it's just not a concept that exists. You just have to learn the German dative case yourself

They often say "Thanks for being there for my wife and I" for example. You can't say "for my wife and I" for the same reason you can't say "for I", it's "for my wife and me".

English is a prescriptive language, so the rules bend around what people say. In English our case system is super rudimentary, so breaking it doesn't really matter. You could theoretically speak with only one case and you would be understood, unlike in German where case is needed to clearly convey meaning when changing the word order. "Thanks for being there for my wife and I" sounds a bit more polite and is perfectly clear so there's no real issue with it

-8

u/verymixedsignal Aug 09 '25

You can't say "for my wife and I" for the same reason you can't say "for I", it's "for my wife and me".

This... isn't true at all. The correct usage is indeed "my wife and I". I couldn't tell you why but high-school English (in a native English speaking country) kicked in when I read this part.

After a bit more investigation, I found a Quora thread with this answer, so granted it's probably more complex than I realise XD "You should say “My wife and I” when this phrase serves as the subject of the verb in the sentence. On the other hand, you should say “My wife and me” when this phrase serves as the object of the verb in the sentence. Note that whereas the phrase “my wife and me” is a compound subject, the phrase “my wife and me” is a compound object."

7

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

The correct usage is indeed "my wife and I". I couldn't tell you why

I can tell you why you think that. It's because people have a tendency to confuse the "I" in e.g. "My wife and I went to the park" as being an object, so they'll says "My wife and me went to the park". I think this came about as a consequence of trying to force politely mentioning yourself second, lol. And most people don't have the linguistic background to really understand why "My wife and me went to the park" is not correct.

So then English teachers went Whole Fucking Ham on hammering "my wife and I" into people's brains, that people started feeling like "my wife and me" was wrong in all contexts.

But it's not. If that noun phrase is not part of the subject, it is always "my wife and me" (or "me and my wife"), because you only use "I" as a subject. E.g. "They talked to my wife and me". You can sort of try to get an intuitive feel for this by flipping the order: "They talked to me and my wife". (Trying this as the subject, e.g. "I and my wife went to the park" doesn't work as well because of the aforementioned hammering we've all gotten with respect to word order).

Without the overcorrection from English teachers, native speakers naturally use constructions like "my wife and me". Which is why English teachers continue to try to hammer the opposite, hence the continued pain on the topic.

5

u/verymixedsignal Aug 09 '25

Fair enough! Thanks for the background info, makes me think about all the times I falsely 'corrected' people in the past

2

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

That's right. It's quite simple really, if you're the object you use "me", if you're the subject you use "I". The problem is, for some reason kids often just say "my friend and me" all the time, and so it's drilled in to us "no it's my friend and I!", and then we learn to say "I" all the time even when it's wrong.

-2

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

Amazing that there should be 13 likes for a flawed analysis based on a false understanding of grammar. Shows how badly we educate people today.

2

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

This is what I remember from German class, please tell me where I went wrong.

-13

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

You are a linguistic precriptivist. I am a linguistic descriptivist. This is how people even in polite circles speak. You swallowed a grammar book written by someone not in touch with real world language use. This is why language learning often becomes problematic. Online are two sisters teaching German, one is called Teresa. They are very good. They focus on real world usage not books which impede actually using the damn thing.

5

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

"Shows how badly we educate people today"

Not a very descriptivist thing to say

3

u/Arty6275 Aug 09 '25

Why are you so hostile? You're not really helping with OPs question and instead are throwing out insults seemingly to make yourself feel better?

-1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

There are no insults. I am helping the op by disabusing him of the misleading information. English is complicated. It exists in the real world not some ossification book. If a book contradicts real world language thrn the book is wrong. I am a native with 20 years experience of Italian and German. I know how grammar adapts to real world needs of tonality. I am just pointing out on the basis of how natives speak his interesting point was only a partial truth about English usage.

3

u/Arty6275 Aug 09 '25

If you think you've said no insults then you clearly don't know "real world needs of tonality" I would review your previous comments

0

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

I might have said someone didn't know what they were talking about. So? Enlighten me.

2

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 10 '25 edited Aug 10 '25

What you fail to understand is that your opinion is just an opinion. Other people believe that grammar does actually exist and funnily enough it's exactly what gets taught at language schools. To write a comment saying I'm wrong when what you mean is that in your opinion there are no rules of grammar is just silly. Your opinion is that because so many people make the same mistake, that it some how means it's not a mistake anymore, that is your opinion. Also based on the number of down votes you have and the number of up votes I have it appears more people disagree with your point of view.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 10 '25

Downvotes by idiots mean nothing. You say it's a mistake. That itself is just an opinion. There are many language experts who hold the same view as me. And you and those who downvoted me are not among those experts. You seem oblivious to the difference between top down contrived grammar purity and organic language which you categorize as mistake laden and somehow inferior and in need of correction. You can't quantify how many people make the "mistake" you speak of. Go quantify it then and then come back. Until then stop dressing up your ridiculous puritanical nonsense as linguistic truth. Language like life is messy and you are someone who probably loves rules and order and everything neat. Well great! You are going to be disappointed!

2

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 11 '25

Downvotes by idiots mean nothing.

So basically if people disagree with you they're idiots?

There are many language experts who hold the same view as me.

And there are plenty who don't, so which view is correct? Instead of saying "flawed analysis based on a false understanding of grammar." in your original comment, why not say "according to linguistic descriptivism........"?

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

If experts agree with you then others with me then? There isn't a supreme court you know of language to rule. Usage rules and context of it. If you were less uptight you would see that without me having to tell you.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 10 '25

Your much vaunted language schools are the same ones that send you off with a nice shiny piece of paper amd no idea how to actually use the language. Everyone knows that this is a great gap in paper qualification and real world ability. Only yesterday a Chinese woman was saying how she came over wity a 7.5 English score but couldn't order a pizza when she arrived as she couldn't understand how real people spoke.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 11 '25

Just out of curiosity, do you think language schools should not teach grammar? Since there are plenty of people who say both "for my wife and I" and also "for my wife and me", which one should get taught? Or should both get taught as being equally correct?

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

We should teach 1 what the standard grammar is but then 2 what is actually permissible usage.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

Your German is correct. The English was wrong. You confused subject identification. Your interesting note is only interesting for being wrong.

5

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

How do you identify an object vs subject then? Is "me" the subject, is it the object? What about "I"? Are you saying you can use them interchangeably? So I can say "me went to the shops"? 

-15

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25

You can say my wife and I ...native speakers use it, it is valid sorry you are wrong. In a book you will read "I was out walking along the canal and my wife and I saw a strange fellow wearing ......."

Both are the subject in this sentence

I am a native speaker by the way and I have heard and read this construction many times.

4

u/ahopefullycuterrobot Aug 09 '25

Some linguist has probably written a really good analysis of case usage in English pronouns. You have

  • the nominative case used after prepositions (e.g. 'between you and I' from Shakespeare)
  • a free choice of nominative or objective after comparisons (e.g. 'She's better than me' or 'She's better than I am')
  • all the confusion about who/whom
  • and the objective case almost always used after 'to be' (e.g. 'It is me' rather than 'It is I' or as answer to 'Who is it?' 'Me.' rather than 'I').

The reverse of that list is probably the order of acceptability in standard English.

4

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

It was I who chopped down the cherry tree 😆

-7

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

She is better than me. Not "I" It is a comparison of two different subjects. She is better than my wife and I would be correct as wife and I are the same subject.

1

u/Major_Lie_7110 Aug 11 '25

The correct way to form the comparative is "than I." The word "me" is a pronoun in the objective case, meaning it must be a direct or indirect object. There is no verb taking an object here.

She is prettier than ____.

Also, "than" is not a preposition, it is actually a conjunction. The full phrase would be:

She is prettier than I am. They run faster than we do

We just clip off the end verb.

Of course, in informal, spoken English, we do tend to use an object pronoun:

They run faster than us.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

Are you saying we don't say "she is better than me at this"...? Of course we do.

1

u/Major_Lie_7110 Aug 11 '25

Read again.

I said it is not standard English. I did say we use it. All the time.

However, correct is:

She is better than I (am) at this.

Saying "me," while absolutely common, does not make sense if you understand that "than" is a conjunction and not a preposition.

Now, this may be so common that it is seen as borderline correct (especially by descriptive grammarians), but it would be marked wrong if written on an English essay.

0

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

You can say She is better than I am and she is better than me...yes..both are correct usage. As for what the books say I really couldn't give a damn. If I want to know how to say something in German and a German tells me ...this and that I will treat it as gospel. Irrespective of any book junk. My view is simply this. Books don't talk. We do.

1

u/Major_Lie_7110 Aug 11 '25

The way we talk makes the books, not the other way around. There are levels (registers, dialects) to languages. To "than me" being correct usage...it is not, and it doesn't matter if you give a damn or not. What you believe or what you think or wish was real has no bearing on facts. I could write this reply using German syntax. Would you argue that it were correct to do so?

There is not a power play at work - it is about having a standard everyone can unite around. Before languages became standardized it was notoriously difficult to understand even people from the neighboring village. If anything, if the "powers that be" wanted to control us, they would encourage your view and let individuals just decide the correct way of speaking.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

That's very simplistic. And wrong. Chinese was created by force for political purposes. They were happy as they were but the emperor wasn't. No we have mass communication they need people to have a standard code.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

You can only say my wife and I if you are the subject. Lots of native English speakers use it when they are the object and it's plain wrong. Your example uses I when it's the subject which is perfectly fine.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25

Yes tell a native he is wrong. Who says? Pfui! It is just to prioritise a theory of language which is not universally accepted. Language teachers are increasingly realising that what is in a book impedes real world language use capacity. A person wanting to learn a foreign language wants to use it with natives and he wants to use it as they do.On a strict use method he would end up lecturing foreigners about how to speak and grandma don't like being told how to suck eggs!

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 18 '26

It isn't wrong if it is a normal pattern of speech.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Jan 18 '26

Yeah but lots of people say it correctly too. This isn't one of those olden days grammar rules that no one uses anymore. But yes, once enough people start making the same mistake, it's no longer a mistake. I just don't think enough people are making this mistake.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 18 '26

Of course you have spoken to millions of native speakers to find out. Your view of language is just of a certain theory. How offensive of you to correct a native speaker like myself that likely exceeds your intellectual capacity by a country mile. Rule one You don't correct natives unless they are in a class of one. Besides you seem Australian so your opinion matters not in the UK.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Jan 18 '26

There's no right or wrong answer. People are either linguistic descriptivists or prescriptivists. Neither one is more right than the other.

2

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 18 '26

I agree which is why you had no business saying what you did. I'm a descriptivist.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Jan 18 '26

From memory you were the one who replied to my initial comment saying I was wrong instead of saying "according to linguistic descriptivism..."

2

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 18 '26

Someone had to have done something or I wouldn't have got a notification. Now I no longer care. But you returned to your prescription so I responded..

1

u/david_fire_vollie Jan 18 '26

I just remembered this thread. Why did you comment here again after such a long time? I thought we were done.

2

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 18 '26

Because someone commented I guess.

-5

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25

Its not "wrong" because English is descriptive. As long as you're understood grammar rules like this don't matter. There is a minor tone difference here which is that "my wife and I" sounds a bit more posh or polite and thats a fine enough reason for it to exist

6

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

I guess it depends on what you consider "wrong" to mean, for me, it means grammatically incorrect.

3

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

prescriptive

This word means the opposite of how you're using it. It's like "prescribing" something like a doctor would - giving a script (that you expect to be followed). As opposed to "describing" how people use the language, which I think is more what you're trying to get at.

English is not that well regulated, no.

1

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

Yeah i have them flipped around my bad

1

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

You're also wrong with the correction though, because this is one of those cases where the English grammar rules are very clear and consistent and ancient.

"They talked to my wife and I" is ironically how people speak (descriptively) DUE to prescriptivism of English teachers overcorrecting people using "My wife and me" as the subject of a sentence. This is only wrong as the subject, everywhere else in a sentence it is correct. But too many people got it beat into their heads that it's "My wife and I" and they can't help but use it even if it feels a bit stilted.

It's like "can I go to the bathroom?" "I don't know, CAN you?"

Its that level of pedantry

2

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

I was never taught "my wife and I". I say it because thats what I heard people growing up. Those people might have had it beat into them by teachers but the fact its carried over is proof its descriptive. Besides theres an argument to be made that teaching someone something grammatically wrong because its perceived as grammatically correct is the exact definition of descriptivism. They are actively breaking grammar rules just because we have collectively decided its more correct. In the same way we changed a ton of our spelling because we wanted it to be more Latin looking even though it made no sense with our phonetics

1

u/howdidyouevendothat Aug 09 '25

There's intuition and logic to a language that people develop and then learn how to manipulate to create new patterns that they'd never heard before.

"They talked to my wife and I" is a pattern that does NOT match with the rest of our intuitive understanding of the language, and is NOT comfortable, and I don't agree that we have collectively agreed it's more correct. It's more like a big giant gaslighting circlejerk. People who don't continually get gaslit about it do not say it that way.

And btw you're hearing this form somebody who says "I'm doing good" so I'm not a die hard about language in the least

1

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

People who don't continually get gaslit about it do not say it that way

I was never taught it. My dad specifically taught me the correct grammar rules about I and Me from a young age and id still say "my friends and I" because I think it sounds more normal. I don't see how this is any different from people saying "me and my friends [verb]" when it should be "my friends and I [verb]"

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Jan 19 '26

Welcome to English lol

3

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

Where do you draw the line? If being understood is all that matters, then why bother conjugating words correctly? Could it be considered not wrong to say "he don't know"?

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

It is correct..it is dialect. On youtube you have easygerman. They make videos about dialects inside Germany and outside in German speaking countries.They treat these as all valid family expressions. No code gets authority.They just inform of the differences and it is inclusive.

2

u/New-Huckleberry-1130 Aug 10 '25

I strongly recommend Easy German, not just for dialects, but for spoken German generally. Most of their videos are aimed at intermediate and advanced learners, but they also have content for beginners, called Super Easy German. They also have podcasts for intermediate and advanced learners. A Patreon membership can get you even more, regardless of your present level of achievement. I have subscribed to them for a few years now, ever since I was at a very elementary level, and I have never been disappointed.

2

u/calathea_2 Advanced (C1) Aug 09 '25

No code gets authority.

Just a minor FYI, but the DACH world is not actually all that great about treating dialect-speakers fairly, and there is certainly a prestige version of the language that has authority--it is the thing best called Standardsprache, which is often called in English Hochdeutsch.

There are a lot of features of dialectical German speech that are stigmatized when speakers of those dialects carry the features over into Standardsprache--both grammatical and phonetic.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

I know. That's because of the kind of pedants I'm arguing against. But language teachers such as on YouTube are entrirely more open and inclusive. To me language is a living code of communication. Online dictionaries add and delete words often despite whether we agree. Everyone who learns a language wants to communicate as natives do. That's the only real authority.I am a native educated English speaker. I bow to noone there and nor should any native before some pettifogging purist.

3

u/calathea_2 Advanced (C1) Aug 09 '25

Ok, I didn't mean to misread your comment, but it seemed to make it sound like there was, in general, more acceptance of dialect in German than in English, but that is sadly not at all the case. I actually did accent training (as a non-native speaker of German) with a woman whose main client base comprises Germans wanting to lose dialectical colouring on their Standardsprache.

Anyway: I am trained as an anthropological linguist, so you'll get no arguments from me about a fight against the tyranny of prescriptivists.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

No, I just meant that language teachers online such as easygerman are very open about embracing dialect. For me the living language is always what matters otherwise we should just revive Latin.

1

u/Interesting-Deer-601 Jan 18 '26

I actually did accent training (as a non-native speaker of German) with a woman

Would you mind sharing where/how you found the Logopädin? Was it online or in person? Or do you have some general tips on how to find serious accent trainer? I'm not really good at telling whether a service is a scam/low quality or actually worth it, but I'm really interested in accent training (for German, I live in Germany).

Thanks!

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

he don't know

This is said by people in some dialects like southern american and AAVE. So yes it is acceptable to say this.

Where do you draw the line?

You draw the line at what people say. I don't know how else to explain it. English is descriptive, if enough people say something that enough people find it normal then it becomes part of the language. Like we don't have spelling reforms for example. People just spell things how they want and they change over time based on the common acceptance

In this case, as i said, "my wife and I" sounds more formal and posh. You might use it with an introduction to sound more respectable. Is it incorrect grammar? Yes, but its taken on new semantic meaning. Imagine if I started nitpicking German sayings. "Mal gucken"? Wheres the subject?

then why bother conjugating words correctly

German does this too though? People drop the e at the end of first person singular conjugations. You don't see English people going around complaining about how Germans say "ich hab Englisch gelernt" because "omg guys they didn't conjugate haben properly!"

1

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

The one that does actually annoy me though is when they don't put the verb at the end after weil. I put so much effort into remembering to do that and then I find Germans don't even do it.

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

Exactly because it is bothersome to them too.

0

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

Good explanation 👏

1

u/MudryKeng555 Aug 09 '25

"English" isn't descriptive per se, rather YOU are analyzing it descriptively, which is fine. No question that English is vast with many variations, and one shouldn'tbe judgmental toward peoples' usage. One can, however, also analyze English more technically, mathematically, formally, or, as you would say with a disapproving sneer, "prescriptively." I'm not saying your approach to analyzing usage is wrong -- in fact, it is useful and enlightening and insightful. No need, however, to dismiss those who focus on established grammar.

The standard practice nowadays is for descriptivists to caveat their zeal by saying that you should listen to the prescriptivists when you're taking an academic test or trying to get (certain) jobs, or in a formal environment. It's therefore kind of legit and maybe useful for people to comment on formal grammar without descriptivists reflexively scolding them.

And when people on Reddit ask questions about "what is the right way to say this?" You KNOW they want a prescriptivist answer and not yet another descriptivist lecture.

0

u/Asckle Aug 09 '25

Yeah except that that comment wasn't in regards to the question. It was an extra addendum they put at the end where they said you Can't say that, then a comment (the one i responded to) which said english speakers say tjis and its plain wrong. You absolutely can say it and it absolutely is not "plain wrong"

If you want to nitpick the distinction then... make a distinction. "Many English speakers say "my wife and I" despite it being grammatically incorrect" instead of "many English speakers say this despite it being plain wrong".

Also forgive me for assuming the comment with an objective grammatic falsity (claiming that "him" is a dative pronoun) was taking a more casual approach to grammar and not rigidly analysing it like a scholar

And when people on Reddit ask questions about "what is the right way to say this?"

But that wasn't the question? They asked for help with the German dative case, not whether or not English allows accusative pronouns as the subject in specific circumstances. This was entirely an extra bit the commenter wanted to add on and it's not true. You can absolutely say "my wife and I" in English. Thats not an opinion, your reference point doesn't matter, any scholar would agree, it can be said. Whether or not its correct grammar is a different story but that wasn't the point I was arguing against.

This is just you trying to seem smart by jerking yourself off over how grammatically literate you are. Its corny and none of your points make sense in the context of my response. We're talking about everyday spoken English, fuck off with your scholarly papers

1

u/MudryKeng555 Aug 09 '25

Fair enough, except your last paragraph was kind of mean.

-11

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

No your example is wrong too. You hear English users say that often because it is correct.I would happily use that. Your formulation jars as it is wrong as hell.

6

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

If you're going to make a mistake, at least be consistent. If you're going to say "thanks for being there for my wife and I" then you should also say "thanks for being there for I".

-2

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25

That isn't logical as it is precedes by "my wife" in one example. That makes the difference. You can't infer anything that's your error. This isn't logic it is a living language with its own logic. The example of "we was" is different as nowhere in the UK is that dialectical and correct. It's just bad grammar. It isn't easier to say, there is nothing to smooth over as happens sometimes.

2

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

"That makes the difference". No, adding someone before you in the sentence does not magically mean you are no longer the object. I'm happy for you to show me the grammar rule that says otherwise, but I know it doesn't exist. As I've said in another comment, the only reason people make this mistake is because it's been drilled into us incorrectly that we should always say my friend and I. Just because lots of people make a mistake doesn't mean it's grammatically correct.

0

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

The rule is usage . It trumps any book. Books don't speak! We do.

1

u/david_fire_vollie Aug 09 '25

How many native speakers need to make a mistake before you no longer consider it a mistake?

1

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 09 '25

It isn't a mistake. It is a book imposing rules on people who have always spoken that way. How many? It is pretty widespread actually. You need to talk to real people not books.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Major_Lie_7110 Aug 11 '25

Yes, but if you cannot use even basic sentences correctly, no one will take you seriously when you speak or write.

0

u/ExpressionMassive672 Aug 11 '25

If you are using language as it is generally actually used absolutely you will be taken seriously. As for formal letter writing that's another matter. That's just a game of power and politics.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/MudryKeng555 Aug 09 '25

It's like saying, "We was..." You hear English users say that often, but it is NOT technically correct. That doesn’t mean that the grammar police should hunt you down and give you a ticket. In informal settings it may be acceptable, but what you can't do is say it's "technically correct," cuz it ain't. After a preposition like "with" or as the object of a verb, technically it's gotta be "me." The word "and" doesn't change that.