1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Er hat keinen Grund."

"Er hat keinen Grund."

Translation:He does not have a reason.

November 26, 2015



He has no reasons should be accepted


Er hat keine Gründe = He has no reasons (plural) Er hat keinen Grund = He has no reason (singular)


Are the two sentences really different in meaning, though? In German and in English? (Asking as a non-native speaker)


"Er hat keinen Grund" (lit. he has no ground) is being translated as "He does not have a reason". Should I take this as he has no grounds for (let's say his behaviour)? Is this a commonly used phrase? Also does "Grund" mean the same as "Ground" like the earth or floor?


"Grund" most often means "reason".

But it can sometimes also mean "bottom" or "grounding" ("Er hat keinen Grund" could also mean, of someone who is swimming, "he is out of his depth; his feet do not touch the bottom of the lake/river/swimming pool").

But "ground" is usually "Boden"; "grounds" (as in the area around a house; or a fenced-in area for animals or the like) would be "Grundstück" or "Gelände". Or "Grundbesitz" if you think of it as something that you possess.

There is also "Untergrund" which can be underground or merely the basis holding up something.


What about in Rammstein-Rosenrot's lyrics when he sings ´Beide fallen in den Grund´?


Danke. That helps ^.^


Reason as logic or reason as motive?


Reason as logic or reason as motive?

Reason as motive.


Here in the states, in English of course, "he has no ground" for the most part means he has no "position of argument", which also can be considered "no reason", so this Deutsch version does fit pretty well. Not like so many versions of phrases I've come across!!


I wrote "he has no ground" and it marked me as correct. In English we would typically say "he has no grounds" even if it was just one thing.


"He has no grounds" ought to be accepted, but it isn't at the moment. I'm going to report it.


I put "reason" just to see if it would be accepted (and it was), but considering which field this sentence is in, I think they actually mean "ground" (sing.) as in "land for farming or building on". I could be wrong though.


Probably not - in my experience, it's not used for "ground = land" by itself very often, but only in combinations such as Grundstück or Grundbesitz. See also my comment to loneangel93.


Since this is about places and land is given as a possible answer it made sense to me that the answer must be he has no land. The given answer is not relevant to the topic.


Could it be " he has no land"? If not, how would you say it?


Could it be " he has no land"?


If not, how would you say it?

Er hat kein Land. / Er besitzt kein Land. / Er hat keinen Grundbesitz.


Gerhardt keinen grund xD


in this whole topic why is there no 'she'? she lives for instance.


kind of a non-issue, but where is the 'does' coming from? I know my translations a little off, but why doesn't it translate to 'he has no reason'- edit I was originally thinking reason as in rationality-? (I know you're not suppose to have a direct translation, still curious!)


“He has no reason” and “He does not have a reason” are both possible translations.

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