1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Und dann geht es nach Hause."

"Und dann geht es nach Hause."

Translation:And then we will go home.

January 13, 2013



I asked my native German friend. It's just the "best translation" of the meaning of the sentence. It's a common phrase in German. If you're on vacation and leave tomorrow, you say: "Morgen geht ES (ab/wieder) nach Hause." Or, if you're working and look at the clock, you could say: "In an hour gehts (= geht es) nach Hause."

"It goes home" - but technically you mean a person - either yourself or you're talking about somebody else going home. We don't really have this wording in English so we translate it with "we". That's literally incorrect but keeps the meaning somewhat intact. Often, in English, we will say that "we're going home in five minutes" without referring to who exactly will be going home, or without making sure everybody is actually going home at that time. But with context you expect people to know what you exactly mean, it's the same in German.


There is actually a similar construction that is used in english, "It's off (to somewhere)".

Eg 1. A work colleague asks "Aren't you taking the afternoon off?" You reply "Yep, just five more minutes tidying up here then it's off home"

Eg 2. You're on holidays away from home and are asked "Aren't your holidays almost over?" You answer "Yeh, only two more days then it's back home."

The "It's off/back home" can also have "with me/us" added at the end but is usually used without.

The fuller "Then it's (off/back) (home/to somewhere) with (me/you/him/her/us/them)" construction sounds more affected and dated to my ear but I'm no linguist.

(I've just found this page which includes many more examples for anyone who wants them: http://www.linguee.de/englisch-deutsch/uebersetzung/it%27s+off.html)

But all this leads me to think that possibly one of the best translations of "Und dann geht es nach Hause." is "And then it's off home."


Not sure where you're from, but in the US, we'd say "we're off to somewhere" or "we're off to home" (even that sounds a bit odd), but never "it's off to somewhere". People would immediately ask you what thing is going off to where!


"We're off to see the wizard..."


And "It's off to the races."


"The wonderful Wizard of Oz."


It is actually also used in the US. Here is just one example (google for more if you want them): http://nypost.com/2014/08/26/long-islands-rubin-swept-out-of-open-now-its-off-to-college/


Interesting, though that's different due to the way it's used in the sentence - there's a subject to give it context. Anyway, you'll notice that the google results that come up for "it's off to" are primarily other tabloid articles, along with references to a song from a 1937 Disney film; "Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to ___ we go" (almost certainly where the phrase comes from, and likely why I've never heard it - I'm not 80 years old). That "we go" part is crucial to the meaning, because it shifts the subject of the sentence from "it" to "we" (unless you're talking about a robot going on a trip, perhaps).


Your opinion of the quality of the newspaper is actually totally irrelevant. A newspaper uses language that its readers understand and use and represents a far greater sample than just one person. The article is also from 2014 so hardly old. I know we all like to think we know everything but your personal experience simply doesn't reflect all English usage and your claim to know what all English speakers normally talk like is to say the least self-centered and clearly inaccurate.


I've no idea what point you are trying to make about tabloid articles. However the way this phrasing is used in this headline is the same way I used it in my examples and the same way it applies to the translation here. In my examples and the translation here the implied subject is the person talking, in the headline the implied subject is the person mentioned in the previous clause. But I appreciate that English usage in the US varies considerably, as is also evident from many other discussions here in duolingo.


Ppl really dislike this comment, but I like it. It is true! It is off makes no sense, we are referring to us, so "we are off" would be correct, but ppl like to defend German more than it merits. German is not the most logical language, or consitant, or pretty or fun


biggles, my point is that a phrase from an old film referenced in headlines of dodgy newspapers is not really a good reference for modern day English. People just don't normally talk like that.


It's back to work for you, mister.


One more smart remark and it's down to the principal's office with you.


I'm from the US as well and while it's not something I'd normally say it's also not something I'd be baffled by if I heard it. Linguee lists plenty of examples.

What's more concerning to me that a similar search in German barely turns up anything. Is this an actual German idiom in common use? If not then I don't see the point of learning it.


I'm assuming you have a typo in this post (though possibly not). It's "off TO home". "It's off home" is something I have never heard before (30+ years native English speaking).

I've heard "I'm off home" (e.g. "a few more minutes, then I'm off home"), but never "it's" as it changes the sentence.

This construction in general is rare, I'd say. Usually in this context, the person would leave off the word "home" (e.g. "a few more minutes, then I'm off"). "I'm off" is from "taking off" as you stated above. The "it's off", however, is from "and it's off to the races" (a merry-type colloquialism). You need "to" if you're using "it's". "I'm off home" can be used (it's rare), as can simply "I'm off" (with no destination attached; to mean "I'm leaving"), but if the destination is anywhere other than home, that, too, needs a "to". :)


No typo, and I have a few more years as a native english speaker than you ;) But what you'll quickly learn here is that english usage does vary and just because I (or you) can't remember hearing a particular usage, doesn't mean that it doesn't occur.


I agree with you. I am a native English speaker and we do say things like 'five minutes and it's time to go' or it's off I go' etc.


Ha, you made me sufficiently curious so I googled it. Are you, by any chance, British? If you are, that would explain it.


" I'm doing the off " and " I'm off home ", used all the time in London.


'I'm off home now' is a very common phrase in English, my native language. 'Und dann geht es nach Hause' does not translate as 'I'm off home now' or 'then we will go home' for me. However, I am finding that 'Duo English' is mostly 'American'


never heard that


Thanks for this insight, it's really helpful!


No problem! I was curious myself, thankfully I have a friend who helps me with this stuff. :)


you have it in French too, with "on" - "on mange"="we eat".


To hinga: in general, the translation of the French word 'on' conducts the verb of the target language to a third person form and would need a pronoun to transmit the idea of a non-identified subject. In English, I think it would be used the word 'one' to transmit that idea and so English speakers would say "One eats...". I hope I have helped. Greetings. March 13, 2017.


To alvaro: the French word "on" generally leads to two possible translations in English, one is "one" as you correctly described, the other would be "we" the way hinga put it. Both are correct, but often depending on the context there would be a better translation for each sentence in particular. Allow me to explain with two examples: 1. On peut trouver ce livre sur l'étagère. = One can find this book on the shelf. =This book can be found on the shelf. Here the person (subject of verb find) is not identified, because the speaker does not wish to emphasize it, all the while focusing on talking about the book. 2. On va boire un verre ce soir, d'accord ? = We'll go for a drink tonight, agreed? = Let's go for a drink tonight, ok? Here the speak does not say "we" but seeing the context, the agent/subject is quite clear. It is not a random "someone" or "one", but "we", i.e. the speaker plus the person/people to whom he/she's talking. In this case, you will not want to translate it into "One will go for a drink tonight, ok?" I hope I made myself clear, cheers :-)


Yes, using the "on" construction to mean "we" is very, very common in conversational French. I watched a YouTube item the other day in which a young woman remarked that she "never" uses "nous" at all.


or for example, when taking a taxi, the driver says: ''Wo soll's denn hingehen?'' which is another way of saying: ''Wo möchten Sie hinfahren?''


That's right. Genauso ist es! :-)


In English it could be: "Okay, going home in an hour". It's colloquial, but kinda shows the situation with the abstract/unspecified subject.


Thank you for the explanation brother, really appreciate it!


Not it is not the same. German is different and oh so frustrating to learn. Sometimes I get the. Impresion that they make the dumbest constructions for idioms I have ever seen. ("take it easy" = always with the quiet, or in german immer mit Der Ruhe. So frustrating)


Have you considered how not intuitive "take it easy" is, literally?


I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this but would "und dann werden wir nach Hause gehen" be a correct and sound translation for the English sentence?


Yes, that would be a possible translation.


Does anyone feel that when trying to learn German, you end up getting questions wrong due to DL constantly trying to correct your English. 'nach Hause' and putting 'to home" should be fine, it shows you understand the sentence; I'm here to learn German not English.


Duolingo is a computer program. Although it was created by people, it does not have all the capabilities of a human brain to understand what you mean. It is not technically possible to put all possible correct translations into this program, or to include all the possible ways that people might say the same thought in English. The computer cannot know what you mean when you make a little mistake. If YOU know that you understood the German, then congratulate yourself. Your objective of learning German is being met. If you are confident that your English was correct and natural-sounding English, then report it under the "report a problem" link, so that your translation can be added to the database.


I cannot agree. Since so many English speakers have lousy grammar, it's really good they get an education on parts of speech, at least, from other languages. Trust me, you would run into your same complaint with any language you study. Perhaps you should brush up on your English grammar first.


The problem is that most of the English translations have bad grammar, not the people using the program. We are getting things wrong because the translations are bad - they often make no sense in English at all - and it's incredibly frustrating. It's hard to believe that it would be that difficult to find a native English speaker to correct the translations (contrary to above, they are not merely generated by a computer program).


It's the age old problem with translation. Some of the English translations will sound wrong because German grammar doesn't suit English translation well. So many times on DL I've changed the verb tense for a more accurate English translation (since we casually use more verb tenses than German) to be marked wrong. So I have had to construct a very bad sentence to be right.

But what am I learning after all! German, not English. So the English translations are teaching me something about GERMAN - for instance that they use the simple present when English uses the future. THAT is a more valuable lesson than making a perfectly grammatical English sentence.


The primary lesson is actually remembering when to type the nonsense sentence, since you can't rely on actually translating it. I don't personally get any value out of it other than that either, but if you do, then good for you. Whether one learns anything from it or not does not in any way negate the point that writing a correctly worded English sentence as a translation should never be "wrong" in the first place.


That totally depends on how deeply you investigate the quirk or failure of translation. I think of Duolingo as a launching pad for studying a language, not a place for perfect English or German translations. If one of my acceptable English sentences is marked incorrect, then there must be a grammatical snafu I'm not comprehending. There are many excellent comments that help so much with almost every weird structure. I'm grateful for those.


Would you say, "I am going to home in English?" That is why this goofy application changes the wording.


I find it really odd when people tell me the way I speak is 'rare'. I use 'I'm off home' all the time (I'm British, by the way), for example, when I've had enough and I'm ready to leave work or I'm tired and saying good night to my friends in the pub. We really need to recognise there are regional variations in the way English is spoken: British English, Australian English and even weird things Americans say like 'Off TO home'. How bizarre is that?


"I'm off to home" and "I'm off home" both sound wrong to this Texan, the second much more than the first. On the other hand, "I'm off to the party/airport/races/office" sounds fine. Basically, you can be off, or you can be off to a destination, but you can't be off a destination. (Unless you're aiming for a certain destination and miss.)

I think the weird thing about "I'm off (to) home" is that "home" is both a specific location and a direction. You say "I'm going home", not "I'm going to home", but "home" is also the place where you're going. Saying "to home" in ANY setting sounds wrong to me, but so does saying "I'm off (something)" without the word "to" immediately following "off".

Instead, I'd probably say "I'm heading home" or "I'm going home".


To me "off to home" sounds far less awkward than "off home", but admittedly, I'm more familiar with how Americans speak, and besides that, I do get your point and agree with your post wholeheartedly.


We use "I'm off home" or "I'm doing the off" all the time in London. My (rejected) answer was " then it's time to go home".


I have learned, here on Duolingo, to brace myself whenever I see the words, "nobody says..." or the equivalent. The following words are quite frequently something I say all the time. :-)


why is it nach Hause and not nach Haus?


From explanations elsewhere, "Hause" is used to indicate "Home" and makes it clear one is not just going to a house or even to a house that one owns, but "home" with all that implies.


Hause is the old dative case form of Haus.

The masculine/neuter dative noun ending -e got dropped in most cases, but survives in some fixed phrases such as nach Hause (home[wards]) or im Falle eines Falles (just in case).


Is "zu hause" not more idiomatic ?


zu Hause and nach Hause mean different things.

zu Hause "at home" describes a location.

nach Hause "home" describes a direction.


Is "es" used as "man" here? I have only one suggestion for this: "es" is for "Mädchen", so it can be translated as "she" in English. But this option is not accepted yet.


I thought the same. :)


So how would we phrase it if we specifically wanted the meaning to be that he is going home ?


Und dann geht er nach Hause "And then he goes home".


And if we're talking about an "it" (eg, das Pferd) ? Is there a way to differentiate then ? Would the translation "And then it will go home" be correct ?


Then it's just context.

Yes, if you had just recently been talking about a horse, then Und dann geht es nach Hause would be interpreted as "And then it goes/will go home".

If you had just been talking about the timetable for your family reunion and mentioned the group photo, then Und dann geht es nach Hause would be interpreted as "And then it's time to go home (for us/for them)".


It is some sort of expression, cause I would translate it: And then it went home.


I think "went" is wrong because it is in the past


I still dont understand why its WE.


It is one of the ways that "es" can be used.

This might help: http://german.about.com/od/grammar/a/German-Personal-Pronoun-EsII.htm


Why is it "Und dann geht es..." rather than "Und dann es geht..." ?


The verb geht has to be in the second position in the sentence; you cannot put both dann and es before it.

(The conjunction und stands outside the position structure of the sentence.)


Is there a difference between this sentence and "Und dann werden wir nach Hause gehen" sentence?

Do you use them in different conversational situations? Danke :)


What about: And then is/came the time to go home. Not as correct answer for the DL but for better explanation of the sentence DL presented?


I think "came" schould be wrong because it is not past tense.


Could this be used if you go to a concert and are told the performance is cancelled? Would you say "In that case, we will go home?"


Isn't it grammatically incorrect to start a sentence with "And"?


No, it's not incorrect. Most of us have been taught at some point during our education that it is incorrect, but it is not. This article may be helpful:



What is the reason for using "es" when implying "we".


es geht (jetzt nach Hause) is impersonal -- it doesn't necessarily imply "we"; it could imply "you" (one person) or "you" (several people), perhaps even "he" or "she" or "they".

A bit like "Now it's time to go home", which similarly doesn't say for whom the time has come to go home.


In eine Stunde geht es ins Bett.


In eine Stunde geht es ins Bett.

in einer Stunde (dative)


When do we use haus and hause?


can we say, and then i/ i will go home?

  1. Is it just in this sentence, or "es" in general with other verbs can mean "we" (es geht : we go, es isst : we eat) ?
  2. We can express future using present tense in German ?


1 - es does not explicitly mean "we". It could mean "they", for example.

es geht nach Hause literally means something like "An act of going-home will now take place", but does not say who will be going home.

Much like Jetzt wird gegessen! means that "eating shall take place now!", which implies that the person who is supposed to be eating is the listener or listeners, but could also mean someone else.


1.Okay thanks that helps. So can we say "Es isst" to express that the fact of eating will take place whithout saying who will be eating, or "es" can be used this way only with "gehen", or "es geht nach Hause" is a fixed expression or idiom that means that ? 2. And what about the future expressed by present tense?


So can we say "Es isst" to express that the fact of eating will take place whithout saying who will be eating

No; you need the passive voice for that: es wird gegessen.

or "es" can be used this way only with "gehen"

I can't think of any other verb that works this way right now.

The destination is more flexible, though: Jetzt geht's los "Now we/they depart"; Jetzt geht's nach Hause "Now we/they go home"; Jetzt geht's unter die Dusche "Now you/we/they go and take a shower" etc.

what about the future expressed by present tense?

Sometimes, yes.

(This is also possible in English: "I'm going to the store tomorrow.")

I don't know what the rules are for when it's permissible to refer to future actions with a present-tense verb, though.


Vielen Dank misinamo. Das ist sehr hilfreich.


can es here mean "I"?


In this exemple, since it is expressing the fact of going home without specifying who .. I guess all pronouns can be used .. can someone correct me if I'm wrong?


Is there a reason we can't just use 'gehen wir' rather than 'geht es' ?


gegessen is past participle which is used for perfect tense (as part of hat..gegessen construction)) and means the act of eating is over and done with. So, why in, Jetzt wird gegessen! means that, "the act of eating shall take place now!"


gegessen is past participle which is used for perfect tense (as part of hat..gegessen construction)

Not only.

It's also used to form the passive voice: das Brot wird gegessen "the bread is being eaten". (Compare the English past participle "eaten" which also does not indicate a completed action here but is only used to form the passive voice.)


Also in english ONE could be used when no one in perticular is meant by the sentence : "and then one will go home "; meaning I or we or any one


Theoretically, yes, but it is not a form commonly used any more.


Und dann gehen wir nach house?


This is not a very good translation. Although there are some narrow colloquilaisms where an English speaker might use "it" in place of a personal pronoun, it would always be a singular pronoun. It would be incredibly rare to use "it" in place of "we", and it would sound very strange to do so.


I don't quite know what you mean. Nobody is suggesting using "it" in English, as far as I can see.

The German sentence uses "es" in a way we would not use "it". That's just because it's a different language with different rules and customs. The first post on this page. from philster043, gives some insight into this translation.


If we were talking about an object or an animal we would use it. For example we could say about a dog : and then it goes home.


My point is that you cannot translate a third-person singular pronoun into a first-person plural pronoun. The result will never be correct.


You can, actually, if that's what is the best translation. One language is not code for a different language, one-to-one translation doesn't always work. Again, I advise you to read the first post on this page, from philster043.


I did read philster043's post, and most of the rest of the thread before posting. I don't agree that this is the best translation. It assumes context that is not present here. A better translation of the sentence, in isolation like this, would be "Well, it's time to go home", or to be more colloquial "Well, it's time to head home". The German seems to be using "es" as a generic stand-in for whatever is going home, with the actual subject being determined by context. The English phrase acts similarly, but the implied pronoun is omitted. E.g. "Well, it's time [for us] to head home."

Without the extra context that's missing in the exercise, you can't tell whether the speaker means "we", or "I", or anything else. Translating it correctly in the absence of context requires capturing that ambiguity. Making up a context to use at random does not give a good translation.


Why not : und dann gehen wir nach hause?


Thank you to Philster043. Duolingo is great at throwing these things in, with no explanation, leaving us scratching our heads and wondering what we have missed


Surely the "will" is superfluous in English, it is implied



  1. Please don't clutter up the forum with multiple duplicate posts. Please delete the extras now.

  2. Please don't write in all capital letters, it is like shouting and not polite.

  3. Of course the English word "then" should not be in the German sentence.

  4. It is always a good idea to read the comments before posting your question. The very first post at the top of this page (from 8 years ago) discusses the structure of this sentence and explains that this is the conventional way of expressing this idea in German. Your question seems to suggest that your version of the German sentence would be preferable to the one we were given, but, had you read that post, you would know that this is not so.

  5. My German source agrees with the first post - i.e., that "Und dann geht es nach Hause" is perfectly normal and would be the usual way of saying this. He adds that "Und dann gehen wir nach Hause" is acceptable, but in any context where the conversation was already about what "we" are doing, it would be a little redundant to use "wir" again, so your suggested sentence would seem, in his opinion, a little stiff or formal.


The male voice actor makes it seem like there's an s between 'und' and 'dann'


Should it then be : UND THE GEHEN


Shouldn't it be : UND THEN GEHEN WIR NACH Hause

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