isn't anstellen to hire? I wrote I will stop him but it was marked as incorrect although it is one of the hints and makes a bit more sense to me?
"einstellen" means "to hire" as well. It only means "to stop" in the sense of "to cease doing something".
Still, it should be accepted no? I can think of several situations where one would say such a thing.
We just had it in "we will stop the fire." The fire is a "thing", not an activity. Was that one incorrect? And what in the world does "I will set him." mean?
I believe that "we will stop the fire" is a mistranslation, if we are talking about the same sentence. Apparently, it is supposed to be translated "we will cease fire".
The hint given for einstellen was to employ. In English, you employ someone everyday, but you hire them once. Is there such a difference in German?
EINSTELLEN, 5 most typical meanings, in order to catch the essence and to (try to) remember 1.engage, hire, take on workers. 2, to calibrate, to adjust (to set the alarmclock) 3. to adapt sth or oneself on sth ( "Du musst dich darauf einstellen" You'll have to get use to it) 4.stop a procedure, switch on something else and (so) stabilize or simplify (the search for.., production, transport service.. ) 5 (mil) stop shooting ("das Feuer einstellen"), stop the hostility (again: as for stabilize), stop an action (strike..). Mach's gut!
In fact, some words are so complex that the only way to catch the essence (in order to memorize them), is a summary. Thanks for the lingot!
The meaning seems to be different, with German dictionaries I checked using different words instead of einstellen for "appoint". After two years of being reported, it seems Duo has made its decision on this.
Does anyone understand why the same verb can mean both 'to stop' and 'to hire'? And why it can't be used as 'to stop' in this sentence? Thanks guys. :)
Think of einstellen as install. By my reckoning the root is the same.
I also think that the use of hire meaning employ is a misappropriation of the meaning of hire. I understand how by common usage in US English, hire means to employ, but to me, and my UK English perspective, hire means rent.
I think this word is the same as in Norwegian. "Innstilling" (noun), "å innstille" (verb). Directly translated "in-set/set-in" It has many uses. Some of them: 1. Han blei innstilt som nummer 3 til jobben. =He was ranked (in-set) as number three for the job. It seems in German it means that he was hired. 2. Fotballkampen blei innstilt. = the football match was cancelled (in-set). 3. Eg er innstilt på å gjere ein god jobb. = I am determined (in-set) on doing a good job. 4. Tv-en var feil innstilt. = The TV was incorrectly tuned/set. And more uses.
...so...this is why I was confused, because I visualize this verb as building something, not stopping something. Also, duo gave as alternate translation 'cease fire', which is quite a different thing. o_O
I now think of 'install' to help with associating 'einstellen' with the translation 'to hire'
From my English perspective, the word is frequently used when you hire a contractor to carry out a defined piece of work. If I was happy that someone could execute a job to the desired standard I would hire that person.
I am confused now. I translated:" I will adjust him". But Duo marked it incorrect, the correct translation it gave : " I will adjust it". Why??????? then I came here to the discussion and the translation given is: " I will hire him". This is all so confusing, why was "him" not accepted in my translation?
"He" or "she" in English is not used for an object which is "it". You would not adjust a person.
You would adjust a tie, a picture, the hands on a clock- all would be it rather than he or she.
Einstellen in English can translate as both to adjust or to hire or to recruit or to position or to justify.
Some confusion. From a UK perspective hire is often vermieten, like car hire. If I understand correctly, here einstellen means to be employed, i.e. To get a job, to be taken on as an employee.
Well it's a similar concept, in that in each case you are gaining some kind of temporary utility in return for payment.
I suppose in US terminology if they money goes to a person who provides the equipment that gives the utility it is "renting" and if it goes to the person who gives the utility it is "hiring". But yes, it does vary between British and US English, and there are still some cases where it overlaps.
But just focus on the abstract meaning of the German word in the end (that's what we're here for), and write whatever Duo wants (or suggest an alternative phrasing if it makes you more comfortable).
No problem with the German word. You summarised adequately the difference between US and UK.
It's just that you wouldn't, stellen ein Auto ein, but you'd possibly hire a car.
er = "he" (nominative)
ihn = "him" (accusative)
ihm = "[to] him" (dative)
Er ist krank = "He is sick"
Ich kenne ihn = "I know him"
Sie gibt ihm einen Apfel = "She gives him an apple" or "She gives an apple to him"
Although sometimes dative case is used where it isn't so obvious, so that might have meant you saw ihm used more often than ihn while learning: Ihm ist kalt ("He is cold", lit. "To him it is cold"), Wie geht es ihm? ("How is he?", lit. "How is it going for him?").
Practicing the lessons on accusative and dative case might help - there are some good explanations in the comments there :)
Also, this table on Wikipedia is a helpful reference.
I don't think so. Being appointed (to do something) doesn't mean the same as being hired or employed, IMO.
'We appointed a new colleague last week'. 'we have the funding for a new post and we hope to appoint someone next month.' IME by far the most common way to express this concept. I suppose I would 'hire' someone to dig a hole in my garden, though. Perhaps we need a native speaker to tell us if there are specific connotations with einstellen and its close cousins (anstellen anyone?). FWIW wordreference gives 'einstellen' as the first hit for 'appoint', although there are many actual or close synonyms.
I see why, however I would use "employ" and "hire" differently to "appoint", as you point out, I doubt I would appoint someone to dig a hole.
"I will set him" meaningless sentence unless you are giving him a concrete overcoat.
Then feel free to report it, rather than comment about it. Only the course contributors can consider your feedback - not your fellow learners.
There's nothing wrong with "hire".
"Employ (someone) for wages."
Also, you can't "mieten" a person.
If you think your translation should be accepted as well, please use the report button. It's no use complaining about it in the sentence discussion.