1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Du wirst nicht nach Kanada g…

"Du wirst nicht nach Kanada gehen."

Translation:You will not go to Canada.

October 24, 2015



You can't tell me what to do! goes to Canada riding a moose and drinking maple syrup


Is the moose drinking the syrup or are you?


Hopefully the moose. Maple syrup is disgusting and not fit for human consumption.

/ I am now banned from Canada and will not be hoing there.


Kann jemand explain Nach and zu and aus kanada? thanks !


nach Kanada = to Canada
aus Kanada = from Canada
zu Kanada = not used


Thank you sehr! so what is "zu" when do we use it?


You use it with things that are not countries. You might go "zum Laden" or "zu der U-Bahn", but not zu a country or a city.


What do you mean by not used?


That means that we don't say that in German. It's the wrong preposition.


Why not, Duo? :(

[deactivated user]

    To my understanding gehen is not correctly used here. Because it means walk. Or do I have the use of gehen wrong??


    Gehen also means go as well as walk.

    [deactivated user]

      Yes it means go, but not by any means other than foot, is what I have been told. So, as I understand it, you can't "go" to Canada, you have to fly, drive or sail.


      You can "gehen" to Canada. It's not used if you're going on a trip or on vacation, but if you move there, for example to work there, we use "gehen".

      [deactivated user]

        Ok, thanks. The piece I've been missing, and context dependent. Thanks.


        Is it not possible to walk into Canada?


        It is (i saw a guy do it one time) but not from Deutschland


        Es ist sehr nett hier.


        K so grammar wise, what im getting, is that werde/wirst makes the verb move back like subordinate prepositions?


        If there are two verbs in a sentence, a "meaning" verb and a "helping" verb that is used to form a particular tense, then the "meaning" verb will go to the end.

        For example, the future which uses werden as a helping verb in German (similar to "will" in English) and the past which uses sein or haben as a helping verb in German (similar to "have" in English for the present perfect) -- e.g. Ich werde meinem Bruder einen Apfel geben / Ich habe meinem Bruder einen Apfel gegeben. for "I will give my brother an apple; I have given my brother an apple".

        I'd say it's not the werde itself that moves the other verb to the end, but rather the fact that infinitives (such as geben above) and past participles (such as gegeben above) want to be at the end.

        The same thing would happen with other helping verbs such as können (be able to), wollen (want), müssen (have to) etc. -- for example, Ich kann meinem Bruder einen Apfel geben, ich will meinem Bruder einen Apfel geben, ich muss meinem Bruder einen Apfel geben. "I can/want to/have to give my brother an apple".

        In a subordinate clause, where the inflected verb goes to the end, it goes "even more to the end" than an infinitive or a past participle, e.g. Du weißt, dass ich meinem Bruder einen Apfel geben werde / Du weißt, dass ich meinem Bruder einen Apfel gegeben habe.

        • 1447

        I know it's contorted English, but shouldn't "You will not to Canada go" be accepted? Sort of like William Shatner and "Boldly Going". (Shatner, coincidentally, is Canadian).


        No, it should not be accepted, because it's contorted and not natural.

        I think most speakers would have to think about it at least twice to determiner whether it's even correct.

        We're looking for normal English here, not things with the sort of liberties you can take in poetry.


        Can this be interpreted as "I forbid you to go to Canada", or is it more of a prediction?


        Is that a threat, Duo?


        Can this mean "You will not walk to Canda. It's impossible!" "Du wirst nicht nach Kanada gehen. Es ist unmöglich!" I perceived it to mean "walk" and wrote that, but it was marked as incorrect.


        Probably you'd use the verb "laufen" or "zu Fuß gehen" to make clear that you really mean "to walk" and not just "to go".


        What about Du wirst nach kanada nicht gehen“


        That sounds incomplete to me; I would only use that to deny the verb and then substitute the correct one: Du wirst nach Kanada nicht gehen, sondern fliegen “you’re not going to walk to Canada; you’re going to fly.”

        As a general negation of the sentence, the word order would have to be Du wirst nicht nach Kanada gehen/reisen/fliegen.


        But why is that the case? Is there a rule I can look to that tells me where to put "nicht?" I'm confused as to why it goes just before the verb at the end and sometimes it goes right after the helping verb at the beginning. TIA.


        The lady in Duolingo just doesnt speak clearly. Often have to listen 2 or 3 times..

        Learn German in just 5 minutes a day. For free.