Translation:The dog is giving an apple to a man.
In your sentence, the indirect object "a man" comes before the direct object "an apple" so you don't need the "to" as it's an understood part of "give to". However, when you place the indirect object after the direct object you need to add the "to" - The dog is giving an apple to a man.
"The dog is giving a man an apple" Is the grammar wrong? :( i got marked wrong (not a native English speaker)
Can I just say that almost none of the example sentences I encountered in the "genitive" lesson actually contain genitives? "Der Hund gibt einem Mann einen Apfel" is a great example of the indirect object––but that's the DATIVE, not the genitive. "Das ist ein Pferd"? "Eine Fliege ist ein Insekt"? None of these have genitives.
I don't know why you got downvoted. The word you're looking for is 'omnivore'. And yes, dogs can eat apples, just should not really eat the seeds. I believe they contain arsenic, and while a few seeds probably won't do anything drastic to them, it's not a good idea to allow them to eat much. Also, feeding dogs too much fruits/veggies isn't the BEST. In moderation, some is fine, keeping in mind that some fruits/veggies are toxic to canines.
FWIW my daughter has a dog that's obsessed with retrieving. Anything round is an item to be returned to the person throwing it. If a man throws an apple; and though he usually will give it to the man, sometimes "The dog gives an apple to a man." This only happens however when there's more than one man, and THE original man doesn't take back the apple. Because the dog is obsessed, he doesn't care who he gives it too; as long as they 'might' throw it again. ;-) He might even give it to a woman.
It should be but it sounds a little awkward. Try this. You "give" something "to" someone. "What" you give is the direct object, and "whom" you give it to is the indirect object. When the indirect object is placed before the direct object you can drop the "to" - so "The dog gives a man an apple". When the direct object is placed before the indirect object you need the "to" - so "The dog gives an apple to a man".
I'd say it's correct but a bit unusual. You might use it if you want to focus "einem Mann" by putting it to at the end of the sentence for special emphasis -- The dog doesn't give an apple to a women, but to A MAN.
The usual word order would be with the dative object in front of the accusative object unless the accusative object is a pronoun, in which case that comes first.
Yes, indirect object gets dative and direct object gets accusative :)
There are a number of verbs which take just one object which is in the dative case even though it is the only object, such as glauben (to believe) or helfen (to help).
I suppose you could analyse those verbs as having an indirect object but no direct object, but however you slice it, remember to use the dative with the single object of such verbs.
Your word order is unusual.
I would say "The dog is giving a man an apple" or "The dog is giving an apple to a man".
So the indirect object (the recipient) gets "to" if it's after the direct object but not if it's before the direct object.
Putting the indirect object first and using "to", as you did, sounds funny to me in English.
Exactly -- with feminine nouns, the dative case is einer, but with masculine or neuter nouns, the dative case is einem.
So for example der Mann: einem Mann / der Löffel: einem Löffel (masculine); das Kind: einem Kind / das Messer: einem Messer (neuter); but die Frau: einer Frau / die Gabel: einer Gabel (feminine).
If there are two noun objects, the dative one generally comes first.
This can sometimes be switched if the dative object is indefinite and is new information, because new information is sometimes put at the end of a sentence.
But here the accusative object is also indefinite, and in this constellation, putting the dative object last sounds odd to me.
It's not black and white, not completely wrong, but I'd say that in this sentence, it's more wrong than right.
In general, put the dative object first if both objects are noun phrases.
Akkusativ, is a direct object, like:
- I eat an apple, apple is the direct object, so in German ; ich esse einen Apfel.
Dativ is an indirect object. Like,
- I give an apple to a man, apple is the direct object, man is the indirect object. In that sentence Apple is accusative, man is dative. In German, ich gebe einem Mann einen Apfel.
The neutral word order is to have the indirect object (dative) before the direct object (accusative) if both of them are noun phrases.
Sometimes, it is possible to change this word order if you want to emphasise the indirect object by putting it at the end, especially if it is new information (e.g. an indefinite noun phrase with "a" rather than a definite one with "the").
So Der Hund gibt einem Mann einen Apfel. is the basic word order. (Note that the nouns have to be capitalised -- hund is not a German word. The capitalisation is part of the spelling.)
Der Hund gibt einen Apfel einem Mann. is also possible, but has a different emphasis -- it means that the dog give an apple to a MAN (and not to someone else). You're emphasising the recipient.
Der Hund gibt den Apfel dem Mann. is similarly possible if you want to say that "the dog gives the apple to the MAN" (and not to someone else).
But Der Hund gibt einen Apfel dem Mann., for example, would sound very strange to me -- you have einen Apfel (indefinite noun phrase: new information) but then you put something else at the end to emphasise that rather than the new information.
So -- in general, the position of the dative does matter.
It is sometimes (but not always) possible to move it, but you would only do so if you wish to convey particular emphasis, not "just because you can"; the meaning does change a bit even if both sentences would be written the same in English (where emphasis is often conveyed only by changing your tone of voice).
My very old German book tells me that in the dative case masculine and neuter nouns may add -e in the dative case. Accordingly "Der Hund gibt einem Manne einen Apfel." should be accepted as well as "Der Hund gibt einem Mann einen Apfel." Now this might be something related to spelling before the spelling reforms of 20 years? Can anyone explain?
why not 'einen mann'?
- There is no word mann in German; it has to be Mann with a capital M
- einen would be masculine accusative -- used e.g. for the direct object. But the man is not the direct object here (the thing that is being given, the thing that "undergoes" the giving) but the indirect object (the recipient). Thus you need the dative case: einem Mann.
Because der Apfel is, in this challenge, the direct object. Thus the article needs to be declined for Akkusativ (accusative case). Because Apfel is masculine, the indefinite article is einen. There are a lot of comments here about Akkusativ/accusative. If reading those doesn't help, please describe what's still confusing and I'll do my best to explain.
So can you say "The dog is giving an apple to a man" in German
No, because that is an English sentence, not a German sentence.
or is it more correct to say "The dog is giving a man an apple." ?
That, too, is an English sentence.
In German, they would both be translated most naturally as Der Hund gibt einem Mann einen Apfel.
You certainly can. In fact, you did.
But I suspect you're asking whether that would be an acceptable translation. The answer to that can be found in any one of the several responses mizinamo gave to others asking the exact same question. If any of those are unclear, please say so and someone will try to help you.
@mizinamo how do you submit a screenshot? There's no way to do it here.
That's right -- no way to upload it directly to a Duolingo comment, unfortunately.
Instead, upload it to a website somewhere (e.g. imgur -- or something like Dropbox or Google Drive in a pinch, as long as the link is shareable / visible to the public), then put the URL to the image into a comment here.
What is it, a mellow attack of schizofrenia? First I translate something like, "was sagst du dem Vater" with "What did you tell TO the father" and it gets branded as an error because according to them the right way is: "What did you tell the father." All right, says I, it does sound better and who am I, an Italian, to question their English? Next I'm faced with the above mentioned sentence and, having learned from my previous mistake, my solution is: "The dog is giving the man an apple" but, was für eine überraschung, this time they do want the preposition TO thrown in! Thus THEIR way is: "The dog is giving an apple TO a man." Could you guys explain the reasons for this apparent idiosyncrasy?
First I translate something like, "was sagst du dem Vater" with "What did you tell TO the father" and it gets branded as an error
Right. "tell" works similar to "say to". You can't "tell to someone" in English.
"The dog is giving the man an apple" but, was für eine überraschung, this time they do want the preposition TO thrown in!
No; they want you to translate einem Mann as "a man", not "the man".
You could have written "The dog is giving a man an apple."
Unfortunately, Duo is not good at picking out which of the correct answers is closest to an incorrect answer that a learner writes, and so the correction might look as if it's correcting something else.
You can say "The dog is giving a man an apple" or "The dog is giving an apple to a man" -- "to" is used if the recipient is after the direct object, no "to" if the recipient is before the direct object.
Both the dog gives the man an apple and the dog gives an apple to the man are correct in English. Case closed. It is very frustrating to be marked wrong for one or the other. It's also inconsistent. At least if duo consistently picked one way and marked the other correct way wrong, I could deal with it and finish the lesson without errors.