1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Trinke Wasser gegen den Durs…

"Trinke Wasser gegen den Durst."

Translation:Drink water to quench your thirst.

January 10, 2013



or "Drink water to quench thirst"..few more options please translators


Give suggestions in the report field!!! I am not a native English, so I don't give many. :)


As a native English speaker, we would normally say something like "Drink water if you are thirsty!" While the given translation is correct, it is just not used very often in normal speech.


That doesn't mean the same thing though. It's essentially a command telling you to drink water and what doing so would accomplish. The assumption is that the person telling you to drink water already knows that you are thirsty.

Telling somebody to drink water if they are thirsty does not tell them what it accomplishes. I could tell you to give me money if you are thirsty, but telling you to do something if you are thirsty doesn't tell you why doing that would help anything.

More to the point, this isn't about what you might say to somebody but about what the statement being translated means. It means that you should drink water to stop thirst.


"Trinke Wasser, um den Durst zu stillen" is equally seldom used (nowadays)


I'm not a native speaker, but have everyday contact with English and it just sounds weird to me.


To my British English ears it sounds perfectly fine. Definitely not common, but not weird, at least to me. 'Quench' is a bit of a fancy word to be fair, but I think it is still used


I agree for Midwest American English. Perfectly fine, just a bit less common.


To be more literal, I think you could translate it as "Drink water to fight thirst", but "quench" is way more natural


Quench is still a normal word in English


The suggested translation is perfectly good English. I'm sure in my lifetime I have said "I need something to quench my thirst" or my mother has said to me " drink this to quench your thirst".


I don't think I've ever heard anyone talk like that.


I'm not sure introducing the conditional aspect ("if") is remaining entirely true to the original German.


It isn't remaining entirely true. I don't know if the original sentence being translated is used in modern German, but the English translation given is not used in regular English speech. That is all I was trying to say. Since this is a German course and not an English course, I translate it the way DL wants me too, even if it sounds strange/dated to a native English speaker.


If it sounds strange/ dated to you, maybe you are young. I am also a native speaker of English and it sounds perfectly normal to me, as it does to other native speakers who have commented


Remember this is a command (the imperative mood) not a suggestion. Think of it as something your mother might have said to you as a child, or a slogan in a health centre, not something a friend might say to you in a casual way.


I don't know the grammar of the "if" but i do know the tone can be imperative. Scenario from my life: Kid begs mom for soda, mom says "no". Kid whines, "but I'm thirsty". Mom says "Drink water if you're thirsty!"


It's an awkward sentence to translate because of the lack of articles and the inclusion of articles. I would say "drink THIS water to quench YOUR thirst", I would seldom say "drink (space) water for the thirst". It just sounds wrong. There need to be a few more words to make it specific to a context otherwise it just sounds weird.

  • 111

I think "drink water to quench your thirst" sounds fine with no article or determiner for the water. I get hundreds of google hits for that exact phrase, so I don't think I'm the only one. However I agree that "the thirst", out of context, sounds a bit weird.


Since Duo normally says the best tranlation for "Ich habe Durst" is "I am thirsty." The two translations below should be acceptable.

Drink water, if/when you are thirsty.

If/when you are thirsty, drink water.

But "Drink water to quench your thirst." I would say is the best formal Translation.


I feel that Duolingo may not accept "Drink water if you are thirsty" because, as stated earlier by Envacance, the goal of drinking the water (quenching your thirst) is not included. It is only implied, and therefore all information is not perfectly transferred.

Although I suppose not all information is transferred in a lot of translations anyway.


I'm a native English speaker; as a command I would say: 'Drink water and quench your thirst.' In fact: 'Drink water to quench your thirst' is a more likely a phrase I'd use if I were explaining to someone rather than directing them.


if it is an imperative sentence should not be: "Trink Wasser gegen den Durst." ?


Both ‘Trinke’ and ‘Trink’ are valid for the ‘du’ form of the imperative. ‘Trink’ is the more modern form.


It would be nice if duolingo had ever explained that. what it said to do was remove the 'st' from the 2nd person singular present. Which is not "trinkest"


Why is 'Trinke' valid for the 'du' form? That is not in anything Duo has said that I can recall. It looks like the Ich form to me.


It is the imperative form of trinken. The conjugation table here may help you.


Why not 'trinkt' ?


"Trinkt Wasser gegen den Durst" should be acceptable. It would be addressing more than one person. Did you have that answer rejected?


Okay while that is a direct translation you wouldn't really say in English "Drink water against the thirst." - would you? "Drink water FOR the thirst" is more correct or even "Drink water to combat thirst."


No, it's not good English. Please report it. “for the thirst” isn't correct either, unless it's a particular kind of thirst. “Drink water to combat thirst.” is an excellent translation.


"Drink water to combat thirst" is ACCEPTED!


Drink water for thirst.--is accepted as of December 2017.


that is what I had thought of putting first, but Duo is so picky about putting in or leaving out "the". I will try it if it comes up again.


"Drink water for thirst" sounds very strange im supprised it was accepted.


My preferred translation, "Drink water for the thirst", is accepted.


That's not English either. It shouldn't be accepted.


I think that "Drink water for the thirst" would be good English, given an appropriate context. For example, if I describe some symptoms including thirst to a doctor, I might be told "Drink water for the thirst".

If I understand you, you are saying that "Drink water for the thirst" does not mean the same as the German sentence. I defer to you on that point; I'm not confident in my interpretation of the German sentence.

However, "Drink water against the thirst" does not fit the context I proposed above, nor any other that I have yet thought of. It seems like bad English, rather than merely a mistranslation.


I am a native US English speaker and I try to always do two translations from German to English. The first is word for word "drink water against the thirst". This is the most important part, because i am not going to translate german to english for other people, only for me to understand the meaning. But also how i would want to say it if i'm trying to speak german. So, in common english conversation, we would not usually use the noun "thirst", there is no way to directly translate this sentence english and have it sound common. But you can usually translate things directly that are acceptable english, "Drink water to counter the thirst." is the translation i will use in my head.


That's a good way to make sense of the sentence but in real life this native speaker would say "Drink water if you're thirsty."


To me, "drink water against thirst" sounds like a preventative measure, while "drink water if you're thirsty" is remedial. Different.


Oh wow, you're right. Thanks! I hadn't thought of that context. And the German sentence „Trink Wasser gegen den Durst.“ is valid in that situation too.


One of the male voices totally sounds like its saying, "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst." Both on the normal and slow speeds.


Yes the same thing for me. Both make and female.


Same here since the voice change


It's especially annoying on "Type what you hear" exercise!


Yeah, I reported it, it confused me a lot and when you're auto piloting you just trust it


For me too. Duo hasnt fixed it for some reason


Wonder why Duo hasnt fixed this error


"Drink water to quench your thirst" would be a better translation of this sentence, but "Drink water if you're thirsty" is probably what is commonly said in English. Is "Trinke Wasser gegen den Durst" something people in Germany actually say to someone who is thirsty?


„Trink(e) Wasser gegen den Durst“ is a normal way to say it in German, but more likely as a generic recommendation than directly to a thirsty person.


The audio is wrong sounds "Trink.Wasser Wasser den Durst"


Yep. They just replaced a bunch of the voice tracks. Looks like this one was....not an improvement.


Yes i agree


8th July 2020, still a problem


why trinke not trink


when to use "Trinke", "Trink" and "Trinkt" in a sentence.? I am a bit confused with this usage in a sentence.


"trinke" and "trinkt" are for talking to a single person (du), with "trink" being more common.

"trinkt" would be for speaking to multiple people (ihr)

And also, "trinken Sie" would be for speaking to a single person using the formal you.


you said - "trinke" and "trinkt" are for talking to a single person (du), with "trink" being more common.

did you mean "trinke" and "trink" are for talking to a single person (du), with "trink" being more common. ?


Why does trinke has and e ending?


Both 'trink' and 'trinke' can be used for du, while 'trinkt' is used for ihr.


Um the new female voice clearly says, "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst" for some reason. She says it both at normal speed and slowed down.


The new voice has an error replacing "gegen" with "wasser" as she says "trinke wasser wasser den durst" 2.7.2020


The female voice said "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst" I guess that was an error error lol


Yes, that's definitely an error!


Wasser is said twice


I noticed that too. For some reason the audio is given as: "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst." Both on the normal and slow speeds.


I hope everybody is reporting this. Heaven knows when they'll fix it, though. They just replaced (some? most? all?) of the voices, and I'm told that is a big hairy deal.


I heard trinke wasser wasser den Durst. Has this happened to anybody else?


Yes. I heard the same thing.


Yes, this is new since they changed the "male" voice a few days ago. Sigh. Oddly, the "female" voice says it, too. Don't know what that's about.


'Trinke' is imperative, or it means that I'm drinking? in such case, it contains an occult subject?


It's imperative. There are not occult subjects in German (as in Spanish for example).


To mean "I'm drinking", you need the subject as well - "Ich trinke". Standing alone, "trinke" (or "trink") is imperative in the "du" form.


Why is the accusative "den" used for Durst?


"Drink water to quench YOUR thirst" sounds best to my native ears. Duo's translation doesn't sound natural at all.


So can you use "gegen" in this way? "Trage deinen Mantel gegen die Kälte."? (Wear your coat against the cold.)


Its like with allergies...Ich bin allergisch gegen Erdbeeren or I'm allergic to strawberries.


The use of "for" in contexts like this is not unusual in English. Drink water for your thirst is no stranger than Use this cream for your rash or Try this bandage for your bad leg. It is counter-intuitive and illogical, but it's what we say.


The recorded voice says, "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst." I listened twice to make sure.


I just saw this sentence for the first time, and tried “Drink water if you’re thirsty.”. It was accepted. “Drink water against the thirst” is not normal English, something else should be the main translation, there are plenty of good suggestions here.



DL accepts "Drink water for thirst" but I also wonder whether anyone these days would say "Drink water to slake your thirst".


wait so is the imperative for drink:"trink" or "trinke" or both?ich bin sehr confused


Either is ok for 2nd person singular (du form). "Trinke" is less used, but my (German-speaking) husband says you might put an "e" on the end of a "du" imperative, depending on the sound of the following word, to make the sounds flow together better. He thinks using the "e" form might also be a bit regional.


As a brit native speaker the sentence"Drink water if you're thirsty" sounds more natural to me.


is "trink wasser gegen deinen durst" OK then?

i know there's like 110 comments on this thread already but i did a word find on "deinen" and no one seems to have asked this yet lol


I hear german sentence " trinke Wasser Wasser den durst"


Yep. A little glitch, I'm thinking, with the new voices.


Me too. You have figure out the missing word my context but confusing all the same.


Please correct the voice tinke wasser wasser den durst


On my device, it said, "trinke wasser wasser den durst", dunno why wasser spoken 2 times


The new masculine robot voice is saying "Trinke Wasser wasser den Durst" for some reason july 7 2020


it sounds in most versions as though 'wasser' is said twice


I could swear she says 'Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst? Am I deaf?


Yes, we know. We can't do anything about it from here. Please keep reporting.


It's really not productive to respond to every single comment about the audio being wrong. Frankly, that just fills up the forum (and people's inboxes) with twice as many redundant comments. I suggest you stop commenting this.


You're right, sorry. I got peeved by the astonishing number of people who apparently never read the comments. I'll delete.


The new audio says "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst.".


I had an audio error with this where she says "trinke Wasser Wasser den durst"


Audio is incorrect as of 7/19/20. He says "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst."


There's an error in my software for this one. The speaker says "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst" repeating "wasser" again instead of saying, "gegen." It is the same whenever this question comes up in the lesson.


Why put the colloquial "e" on trink here to confuse everyone? Stick to the basics that you describe in your tips section Duo!


Drink water against the thirst certainly doesn't sound right in English. Personally I would say "Drink water to avoid being/getting thirsty"


Does 'Trinken Sie Wasser, um Ihren Durst zu löschen' work as a translation for 'Drink water to quench your thirst'?


Is the following German sentence correct? "Trink Wasser, damit du deinen Durst löschst."


So it is now 'trinke Wasser' but a couple of lessons ago it was 'trink kein Bier'. Trinke was said to be old fashioned usage. So drinking water is old but drinking (or not drinking) beer is modern. Duo needs to be consistent.


Or maybe we need to be familiar with both versions we are possibly going to hear in the wild.


Doesn't "gegen" mean against? Then shouldn't this phrase mean "drink water against the thirst"? A bit confusing here...


Doesn't "gegen" mean thirst?

I assume you mis-wrote this, but I'm not quite sure how to interpret it.

Then shouldn't this phase mean "drink water against the thirst?"

Yes, the word-for-word translation is "against the thirst," but that sounds very strange in English. "Drink water to quench your thirst" sounds better and means about the same as the German sentence.


Can someone explain the difference between “trinkE“, “trinkT“ and “trink“ ?? please


The voice says "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst" for the speaking version of this. Das ist nicht richtig!


She said wasser twice and did not say gegen


Surely (Trinken Sie Wasser, im Ihren Durst zu stillen) is the correct translation of, "Drink water to quench your thirst". . . . . ?


yes, i must agree that the translations are awkward. I understood what the sentence was asking for and tried something that sounded natural in english: "drink water when you are thirsty". Funny that this was rejected, but the same sentence without the word "you" is accepted.


It's a matter of context. A nurse talking to a patient might say “Drink water when(ever) you're thirsty” = „Trink(e) Wasser wenn du durst hast.“, but in an informational brochure, the impersonal “Drink water when thirsty.” = ‘Trinke Wasser gegen den Durst.“ oder „Gegen Durst Wasser trinken.“ would be more likely.


I tried 'drink water to prevent thirst.' Not accepted. Not sure if it should be, it's not quite the same.

  • 2944

No, not quite the same. However, "Drink water to stop thirst" was accepted on 13 Feb 2018. So maybe "prevent" is accepted now too.


So "gegen den" means to quench something? Can I apply the same idea with all the other contexts?


I would think it only applies with "Durst" but I am only thinking from an English point of view not a German one! You may wish to look at the Oxford English dictionary of "quench" though - https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/quench I don't know if you can use the german expression " gegen den Durst" for all of these "quench" uses - I suspect not. Perhaps a native German speaker can answer your question better than me.


I am not a native speaker of English, I have no idea what "quench" means.


Here, quench means to stop thirst. It can also mean to put out a fire.

I'm on mobile and timestamps don't show on my phone, so sorry if I'm responding way later.


I understood this phrase to mean that in order to avoid being thirsty you should drink water. Hence I translated it 'Drink water to stave off thirst'


"drink water if youre thirsty" is accepted


As is "drink water to prevent thirst."


"Drink water to fight the thirst" works too


So does "Drink water to fight thirst." I think i will try "Drink water to vanquish your thirst" next time.


Nope, didn't work


Warum ist "Drink water to rid your thirst" falsch?


"Drink water to be rid of your thirst" or "Drink water to rid yourself of thirst" would both work. So would "Drink water to get rid of your thirst."


Everyone is saying 'YOUR thirst' even though the sentence says 'DEN'. Shouldn't it be 'DEIN'?


Well, it would be "deinen" (Akkusativ ist hier nötig), but there's some idiomatic usage going in play. Still, I think one could probably use deinen.


"trink Wasser gegen den Durst" was not accepted as correct. I was told it should be "trinke". There have been several comments over 5 years on this thread asking why the e is needed but no explanations. The report button does not give the option of 'my answer should be accepted'. Come on Duo, this is supposed to be teaching us German. How can we learn if we do not understand our mistakes?


What does quench even mean????


Quench means several things like quenching a red-hot metal blade by immersing in oil to cool it down.

In this context "to quench your thirst" is the same as saying "to slake your thirst" or to satisfy your thirst by drinking.


Why is it "den" durst?


Akkusativ. Note that Durst (not durst) is a masculine noun. The definite article for a singular, masculine noun, being used as an Akkusativ, is declined as den.


‘Drink water against the thirst’ is also accepted.


Why there is "your"and not "the"thirst?


It makes more sense in English to say "your thirst" because it is a feeling/desire belonging to a person, rather than something more detached ("the thirst"). This is one of those situations where the spirit sentence is preferred over the literal translation.


It makes better sense yet to just say "thirst". There is no reason to add a possessive.


Why "Drinking water helps against thirst" isn't acceptable?


Because the German sentence is a command: "Drink water to quench your thirst."


Why "trinke" not "trink"


I'm pretty sure that it can be either for singular imperative. ( Update) Havingg just skimmed through these comments it seems that 'trink' is a more modern version, but both are acceptable.


I would say the translation is still wrong as "Drink water to quench your thirst" because it says "your", which is not correct translation for the "den Durst". The ideal would be to change the German expression to "dein Durst", but as non German native, I'm not sure that would be possible.


It's a matter of what is usual in the different languages. We would naturally say "your" thirst, Germans naturally say "the" thirst. That's all.


"Drink water to combat thirst" is accepted :)


I just typed this with out den but i got it right


Why is trink not accepted ?


A few more translation options, please "Drink water to beat thirst" for example


Why is it Trinke and not Trink?


Adding the -e is how the imperative is normally formed, but in spoken German, it is often dropped. Detailed discussion at CollinsDictionary.com.


How to figure out when to use "trinke" and when "trinkst". I understand the conjugation of "trinken" with ich/er/sie etc, but if it just written "Eat and drink" and likewise, how does one know which form of "trinken" to go with?


quench....which word is "quench" in this German translation? Not gegen?


There's no individual word that translates to "quench"; the literal translation is "Drink water against the thirst" ("gegen" = "against"). But that means the same as "Drink water to quench your thirst," which sounds better in English.


This sounds like a water company advertisement


I have written: "Drink the water against your thirst", and it was accepted. Is it really right? I am not native English speaker, help me please to understand.


It's very literal, not really fluent English, but people would understand it. I guess that's all they wanted. This time.

Edit By the way, please delete your 2 duplicate posts - they have moved down the page, due to people downvoting them. This page in particular has enough clutter! (And yes, I know that Duo lately has been taking so long to post a comment it's easy to suppose they didn't get it and post again.)


I wrote:"Drink the water against the thirst", and it was accepted. Is this really right? I am not a native speaker. Help me please to understand. Thank you in advance


No, that's not a natural English sentence at all; I'm not even sure it would be understandable. You need something like "Drink water to quench your thirst."

In addition, you have "Drink the water" but the German sentence just has "Trinke Wasser." I'm rather surprised Duo accepted your translation, to be honest.


Drink water your thirst goes? Would someone please tell me why it's wrong!


That's not an understandable English sentence at all. I'm not sure what you're translating as "goes" either; there's nothing in the German sentence that means that. (Perhaps you meant something like "Drink water. Your thirst goes [away]," but that's pretty different from the German sentence.)


what the matter¡ "a" article is huge problem in this application. No necessity to use "a" article in this case¡


Drink water to satisfy your thirst


it is spoken incorrectly as 'trinke wasser wasser den durst' here and elsewhere


The audio actually says, " Trinke Wasser WASSER den durst". An error.


Hey, Duo!! The audio that "reads" this sentence is saying "Trinke Wasser Wasser den Durst." Please fix this!!!


The sound is " Trink Wasser Wasser den Durst" fix it!!!


"Gegen" isn't pronounced properly as it sounds similar to "wasser"


Can someone please explain why "trinke" has an -e ending instead of being "trink"?


Most verbs can optionally add an "-e" to the imperative, with the exact same meaning. Both "trink" and "trinke" are correct.


Suggest, "Drink water to get rid of the thirst."


Trick or trinke then?


Why not "trink" after dust off?


I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking why you can't use "trink" instead of "trinke", or why you can't put it at the end after "Durst"?

To answer both of those, you can use "trink," and imperative sentences always put their verb first. If this doesn't answer your question, please rephrase.


Why is it "den Durst" and not "dein Durst"?


What is the difference between ( trinke and trinkt) why not: trinkt wasser gegen......


"Trinkt" is correct and should be accepted. The difference is that "trinke" is singular (tells one person to drink) and "trinkt" is plural (tells multiple people to drink).


I think "Trink" instead of "Trinke" should be accepted. Thank you.


Why is it trinke with the e ending. Not sure why but I thought it would be trinkt or trink. Please explain these commands.


"Trink" and "trinkt" are both also correct. Most "du"-form imperatives can be equivalently said with or without that "-e" ending. Both "trink" and "trinke" are correct for a "du" imperative, and "trinkt" is correct for an "ihr" imperative. Duo just happens to use "trinke" in this particular exercise.


Can I use "trink" instead of "trinke"? Why actually is placed " trinke"?


Yes, both "trink" and "trinke" are correct. This is the case for most verbs; you can include a final "-e" or leave it out, and the forms are essentially interchangeable (though one or the other may be more common).


Thanks. However the lack of administrative effort to put things right or explain gives me zero confidence in the method and thus my lack of desire to recommend it to friends. Disappointed.


Why trinke insted of trink for singular and trinkt for plural?


"Trink" and "trinke" are both valid singular imperatives. This is true for most verbs: you can include a final "-e" for this conjugation or leave it off. And as you said, "trinkt" is a separate form for the plural imperative.


why trinke not trink or trinkt? we have no idea how many people are being spoken to


Please see reply from -Copernicus-, 1 month ago, to a similar question - just above.


Why is "trinke" in the ich form? Woukd this be someone talking to themself?


Why is "trinke" in the ich form? Would this be someone talking to themself?


"Trinke" here is the imperative/command form (which just happens to be identical to the "ich" form).


Taken directly from the "Tips" for the "Imperative" lesson:

You’ll sometimes see an ‑e added to the du command (for example, Trink! and Trinke!). Don’t worry, the meaning is still the same.


The sentence is fine. It is just a little outmoded but 'to quench' was in everyday use a few decades ago... And context is all.


The sentence is fine. It is just a little outmoded but 'to quench' was in everyday use a few decades ago... And context is all.


As a native English speaker, in everyday language I would say, 'Drink water for your thirst' This was accepted by the Owl :)


Drink water to go against thirst?

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