"einen" is just the accusative of "man" in this context. (it is not an article and it has nothing to do with the number 1)
You do not have this word at all in English, and often a good way of translating "man" is "you"
"Children change you!"
Declination of "man" :
Nom. "man" - Man weiß das nicht recht.
Gen. - (a genitive of "man" does not exist)
Dat. "einem" - Sowas muß einem doch erklärt werden!
Acc. "einen" - Das kann einen schon sehr deprimieren.
Actually in English you could say 'Children change one', but only posh people talk like that.
I wrote this, and it was accepted. Confusingly, while my grammar book confirms what @Zchbaniel25 so usefully says, my dictionary seems to imply that einer is the nominative form of einem/einen. Can anyone throw any light on this?
(Not a native) 'Man', strictly speaking, exists only in nominative. In the other cases, it is replaced by the forms of the indefinite pronoun 'eine(r,s)'. To my mind, 'man' and 'eine(r,s)' have basically the same meaning, the only difference being that 'man' always refers to an undetermined person, while 'eine(r,s)' can also refer to an undetermined person/thing that has already been mentioned (a sort of anaphoric use). For more info and examples, visit the page: https://goo.gl/YgEvrI
I tend to think of "man" as referring collectively to humans (e.g. mankind) and not just someone in particular. That is one way to look at it, and it helps to differentiate the word from "ein". It certainly helps me since if used as an object in theory, I might think of it as not just being one person, but all of mankind.
That may or may not be the accurate definition of the German "man", but that helps me in avoiding the confusion.
Or Proper people would say "Kids change ones self" but that's kinda old English now.
Oneself (not ones self) would shift the emphasis from the children to the speaker. And "proper" people would say that "kids" are young goats.
No, "man" is never used in genitive.
The genitive has to be changed into dative first: "Sie helfen der Zukunft von einem" would be used to for "They help one's future".
Actually there is a genitive form of "einer" called "eines". It is not really used often any more, but of course you can say it and the people would understand you. It is used for example as the genitive of time (Eines Tages sah ich eine Eule).
English does have this word!
My understanding is "Man" (not to be confused with Mann) = One = singular form of Mankind.
In this context one can means formally:
1) "a" man / "a" person / "a" human being / someone / I / you / he / she / they
Einen (akk) is just a contraction of "einen Man"/"a man"/"you" to simply "a".
In English "a man / a person / a human being / someone / I / you / he / she / they" is contracted to simply be "one". It would not be contracted further.
Only similar contractions to the German I know are things like "Thee" for you/yourself" etc. but they aren’t really used in modern English but "one" is still used a lot in certain circles and contexts as far as I know.
E.g. One shall not speak in the library.
One should not think of such things.
One means you no harm.
Children change one / Children change a person / Having children changes someone.
Although one must admit, when one should speak in such mannerisms, into the ear of one another, could lead one to appear a fraction pretentious!
Of course we have the word in English. I first learned to translate "man" as "you" in the sense of "one", which was totally familiar to me. Now "one" comes to my mind every time I see "man" and that helps me immensely. This is the first time that I am learning that German uses "one" in the same context that English does. Now I have to learn to decline it. My vocabulary is growing, but my grasp of grammar is lagging far behind. I need to go live in Germany for a while.
Here's an interesting fact. In English, "one" can even refer to the first person. "One thanks the gentleman for the lesson." One (third person meant here) might use that sentence to parody how a "proper" butler speaks.
Um, it's actually not. "Royal we" means you're referring to yourself as "we." It specifically means using the plural to refer to oneself.
Yeah you are right, Copernicus, apologies, got my wires crossed, I kinda thought that after I posted but hoped that nobody would read my post. I blame my age for the confusion, hope I didn’t confuse anyone else! But you must admit that using ‘one’ in English is quite royal.
Verändern : to change
Wechseln : to switch
I don't know whether "verändern" and "ändern" are different. But I have a feeling either they have slightly different meanings or they are synonims.
A really good explanation between ändern and verändern can be found here https://german.stackexchange.com/questions/5898/what-is-the-difference-between-%C3%A4ndern-and-ver%C3%A4ndern
"Children change one" sounds awkward to me (respective to "Kids change you"), but I guess it's valid in the context of children changing something, is that what is meant here? Also, is "Children make one change" a valid translation?
I think "Children make one change" is a good translation.
But is it better than "children make you change"?
"Children change you" is slightly different from "Children make you change." In the first sentence, it is the children who are doing the changing. In the second, the children are impelling you to do the changing.
In this case, it may come down to about the same thing, but speaking more broadly, another example may clarify: "I change the diaper" means I do the dirty work. "I make the diaper change" - well, good luck with making that happen.
"Children change one" is indeed pretty bad. Kids change you or Kids make one change are really the best translations for this phrase.
I typed "children change the one". But unfortunately it was also rejected. But I think it's a normal translation.
That doesn't work in English. "The one" is rarely used by itself, never when refering to "you" or a generic person.
It is clearly a Jeopardy question... Children change one...What is a diaper?
Sounds like a Jeopardy question.
Children change one. What is a diaper?
Duo's translation is 'Children change you'. I think that there could be a few different/better ways to convey that in German. Einer would not be my first choice. What about dir, euch, Ihnen? Children change a person or Children change one are different than children change you. C'mon Duo, clean it up.
Nothing wrong with "children." Several possible translations with "children" are accepted (e.g., "Children change you"). Probably you had another mistake-- what was your entire answer?
I think "kids" comes directly from German.
Ein Kind - a child
in slurred English becomes: a kid
which is then turned into the English plural: kids
Thanks for that Copernicus. Guess I should have checked some sources rather than just checking the top of my head...
Reiterating that "Children changes one..." is proper English and should be accepted.
No, sorry. "Children changes one" is ungrammatical. "Children" is the plural, but "changes" is the singular form of the verb. You can say "Children change one," although it's probably not how most people would express that thought in English.
Why is this not "Kindern verändern man"? I have never seen or heard this use of "einen" to mean "man". Is it unusual?
Zchbaniel's comment has already explained it, but just in case, 'man' is exclusively nominative.
Aaaahhhhhh. After 11 years of learning this language first-hand, I did not ever grasp that before. I love Duolingo!
"wechseln" is not used in this context (and your first version of 'wechseln' was correct: it's lower-case ;)).
For more comments on the differences between "wechseln", "ändern" and "verändern" see here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/2301308
(wechseln - to swap things, to get another item. ändern - to adjust the same thing. You can find the source thread here: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=239950)
You should be able to edit your original post directly and not have to make a new comment.
children CHANGES one, a child changes one, pretty common usage where I'm from but not accepted.
Because "children" is plural and therefore requires a plural verb - "change". "A child" is singular and therefore a singular verb is correct. (In UK anyway)
Children is more than a noun, i.e. a figure walks into a room to discover men acting inanely and comments "children please", it is meant as a condition or state of mind. I don't believe the sentence means that a child changes a person, I believe it means that responsibility for a child changes a person and in that regard using the singular would divest the word of it's nuance.