"After everyone comes."
Translation:Nachdem alle kommen.
'jemand' is someone, anyone and a singular indefinite person versus everbody. Also, have another loook at: http://german.about.com/library/weekly/aa061900a.htm and this http://duolingo.com/#/comment/169769
'Nach jemand kommt' is incomplete. 'Jemand kommt nach Stuttgart' is a full sentence. But that's not what duo's example is supposed to say. After a certain point in time which is defined by the action of someone arrival, follows something else. So, this example is actually a subordinate clause without any context or main clause. the latter would define the following action or whatever else might follow.
Ah. Thank you. So "jeder" might be OK, but not "jemand." (I keep working on that distinction, but sometimes it seems like just when I have it nailed down, it switches. ;-) Still working on that . . . .
But I'm still not clear about "nachdem" versus "nach." I thought perhaps one needed an object for the preposition (thus nachDEM rather than nach by itself), but isn't "everyone comes" just that object?
Thanks again for all the help. I really appreciate it.
Then, it would be: 'Nachdem jeder kommt'. But please let me remark, this is a horrible sentence in my opinion. The present tense is just not common for this kind of subordinate clause. And being exactly this, it needs context and a main clause. And 'jeder kommt' doesn't make it better. The only case where I can imagine present + nachdem is a pseudo-future tense, which uses present in German. 'Nachdem alle kommen, können wir Tische reservieren' - After everyone will come, we're able to reserve tables now. 'jeder' wouldn't work well here, you would have to rephrase it: Nachdem jeder, den wir eingeladen haben, kommen wird - After everyone who we invited will come etc.
'Nach' needs some very special objects in dative case. Either a place or a time or a direction (left, right, cardinal directions) or several different exceptions like 'nach der Schule' or 'nach dem Fest' - after school, as stated in the first link, and after the festivity. In most cases, these objects are nouns. This is not given here.
'Nachdem' on the other hand uses verbs, actions, to mark a certain point of time and 'nachdem' is always the first word of a subordinate clause, which 'nach' isn't. Here's an example from wiktionary: Nachdem er ihn geschlagen hatte, ging er nach Hause. - After he hit him, he went home.
Thanks. That's a great explanation. So I'll use "nach" with a specific noun, "nachdem" if I need to, essentially, turn some other phrase into a noun.
And I think I see what you mean about the pseudo-future versus present tense. In English, such a phrasing is common, but the logic of the grammar doesn't stand up to close scrutiny: "After [some future event expressed in the present tense] we [will do something expressed in future tense]. If the second clause is expressed in the present tense, it changes the meaning of the sentence--e.g, "After he hits him, he will go home" is one thing, ""After he hits him, he goes home" means that this unsociable behavior has become a habit (he has done this repeatedly and can be expected to continue doing it).
I gather German would handle these instances differently, I'm not sure I quite get it, but I'll watch for the instances.
I don't know if 'nachdem' turns a phrase into a noun..? I would rather say, 'nachdem' turns a whole subordinate clause into a time specification.
They actually aren't completely different. You can express the on-going, regular behaviour only with auxiliary words: Jedes Mal, wenn er ihn geschlagen hat, geht er nach Hause. OR: Immer, wenn er ihn schlägt, geht er anschließend nach Hause. Literally, that would translate to: Every time, when he has hit him, he goes home. OR: Every time he hits him, he goes home afterwards. These little auxilaries can differ: Sonntags geht er in die Kirche = On sundays he goes to church. That's present in German, but yet 'sonntags' (on sundays), expresses a regular behaviour which refers to and reaches into the future. The tense you use in these cases depend on other factors, so it can very well be present, too, like in our last example.
Wikipedia is giving the following example for the German Futur I: Marion wird morgen gegen 16:30 Uhr eintreffen. The marked compound verb is what qualifies this sentence as Futur. But you may also express it like this: Marion trifft morgen gegen 16:30 Uhr ein. Now, the marked verb is in present tense. It's a forecast. You know this will or you rely on this to happen. And exactly like in the passage I wrote above, 'morgen 16:30' marks the actual time, independent from the sentence's actual tense.
Thanks. OK, if I understand correctly, "nachdem" is not simply a compound word ("after that"), but rather corresponds to one English usage of "when," or "at such time as this has happened."
And, also if if I understand correctly, the present tense may be used to specify ongoing action or future action, if, but only if, there is a time designation.
Did I get it?
It's similar to the the english 'When (x happened)', yes. That's why I wasn't happy with the present tense, since as far as I know in both cases, G. and E., you likely will use a past tense, most likely even Perfekt (perfect) or Plusquamperfekt (past perfect). Although it primarily is 'after that', more precisely it is: 'after that, what is described in the subordinate clause', the action of the main clause happened, happens or will happen. You're also right about the present tense. I think you got that very well. :)