1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "What brought you to this cit…

"What brought you to this city?"

Translation:Was hat dich in diese Stadt geführt?

February 24, 2013



Why doesn't "Was hast du in diese stadt gefuhrt" work?


Because that sounds like "What have you brought to this town?"


Duolingo suggested "Was hat Sie zu dieser Stadt gebracht?"once. What's the difference?


Your sentence has the verb hat in the third person singular, so the subject is was, and Sie must be the direct object.

Manny4us's sentence has hast in the second person singular, so the subject is du, and so was must be the direct object.


Okay so, in my sentence if "hat" was switched with "haben" would that change Sie to the subject?


Yes, it would.


Manny4us, look at these two English sentences:
1. What has brought you to this city?
2. What have you brought to this city?
Can you see that these are two different sentences with two different meanings?
Can you see that in 1 "what" is the subject and "you" is the object; whereas in 2, "you" is the subject and "what" is the object?


Ist "hat geführt" das selbe wie "führte"?


hat geführt --> Perfekt; führte --> Präteritum


Why "in diese Stadt" instead of "in dieser Stadt" ? Shouldn't we use dativ after in?


One is a position, one a destination. (in)to this city = in diese Stadt with accusative, (with)in this city = in dieser Stadt with dative.


does "nach diese Stadt" not work? Either with führen or with bringen?


Nach is typically used without an article (nach Deutschland, nach Hamburg), while zu is used with an article (zu der/zur Stadt, zu dem/zum Haus)

  • 1129

Good to know.


    Yeahhhh, but if you visit a friend you go zu ihm.


    I have the same question. You would say "Ich gehe nach Berlin" right? Why not with "Stadt"? Berlin is a city after all.


    Proper nouns (Berlin) and common nouns (city) act differently in many languages, including German. ;)


    wow! You're good in german as well


    Why is this offered option wrong??

    Was hat Sie zu dieser City gebracht?


    City is not German, but it can be some kind of "denglisch".


    I think I must've seen it among the proposed translations.


    You could, if you want to, use it as a synonym for "Innenstadt", the "inner city" / city centre of a, well, city (not a smaller town). "Ich gehe in die City" - it's really not common with the people I hear talking.

    "Was hat Sie zu dieser Stadt gebracht?" sounds like "What (e.g. a car or train) brought you to the borders of, but not into this city?"

    --> Was hat Sie in diese Stadt, in dieses Hotel / nach Berlin, nach Deutschland / zu mir, zu unserer Firma geführt?


    Why "hat dich" and not "hast dich"?


    "hat" is third person, "hast" is second. The question asks for the event, cause or intention that has led you here, thus the event is the subject and the third person is used. "What have you led here" would ask for something you led here and make you the subject, thus using the second person "Was hast du hier her geführt?"


    "Was brachte dich in diese Stadt?" - Warum akzeptiert das Duolingo nicht? I think this is not wrong.


    Why is it 'zu dieser' and not 'zu diese' ? i thought the acusative was used when any kind of movement takes place


    "zu" is a dative preposition, not a two-way preposition


    So why was "Was habt ihr zu dieser Stadt gebracht" marked as incorrect?


    Because that would ask what the person being asked has brought to this city, not the intentions or events that brought them there. "What has brought you here" vs "What have you brought here". In the first case, you'd need the event as the subject and a third person, where you would be the object being led here by the reasons that did so. In the second case, you are the subject, need a second person verb and the object would maybe be some people, trouble or whatever you brought there. Clear enough?


    Would you interpret this sentence as (a) Why did you come to this city, or (b) How did you get to this city, or (c) both? If (a) or (b), how would you translate the other one? Thanks


    (a) is the proper interpretation here.

    Was hat dich hergeführt ? - What brought you here ? (Reasons for coming)

    Wie bist du hierher gekommen ? - How did you get here ? (Means of transportation)


    "Was führte dich in diese Stadt?" A correct translation from my point of view, but not accepted.

    • 1825

    "Was führte dich in diese Stadt?" is not accepted. This is getting a bit ridiculous: about a half of the exercises of this sort do not accept Präteritum. I keep reporting, but to no avail.


    isn't 'Was brachte dich in diese Stadt?' also OK?


    Does "Was hat Dir hier gebracht?" make any sense? (I don't know, maybe I should use Dich... no clue...


    You should use 'dich': Was hat dich hier her geführt? 'gebracht' doesn't really fit.

    • 1129

    I am trying to understand dich. Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof. ;-)


      There's no reason for the use of a dative personal pronoun. So the default is accusative.


      As a native English speaker, there's never a reason to use the dative ;-)


      To marziotta: Your proposal would be perfect in Berlin. If you try to use the local dialect. It's totally wrong in Hochdeutsch. Was hat Dich hierher gebracht would be correct but not the translation of the sentence of the exercise.


      Why does it not accept 'City' instead of 'Stadt' ?


      City is no german word


      yes, city is also used in German but it means only the center of a city, normally the shopping area.

      For example the "Stadt" is "Berlin" and "Berlin city" is the "Ku'damm"...


      Do you have to change the verb to the perfect tense?


        It sounds more natural in spoken German to use the perfect tense here.


        Is this necessary always wrong? Was hat euch an diese Stadt geführt?


          an is the incorrect preposition here. If you used in it would be correct.


          can you also say ''zu dieser Stadt geführt''?


            Yes, but as mentioned in another comment it sounds like you reached the boundary of the city then stopped.


            Was hat Sie in diese Stadt gebracht is given as a proper answer. My question is this: If you're using "Sie", shouldn't the sentence read: Was haben Sie.....? It seems wrong to combine "hat" with "Sie."


            Was hat Sie ...? is fine.

            The subject (the person or thing doing the bringing) is was, and Sie is the direct object in the sentence (the person who gets brought).

            Verbs inflect according to their subject, not their object.


            Perhaps that would be "what have you brought to this city" instead?


            Is "Warum hast du diese Stadt gekommen?" an ok Translation.

            i.e. "Why did you come to this city?"

            To me that that is the meaning of this question. Instead of the literal meaning which would have answer like "The bus brought me here."

            Is my answer not accepted because "Was hat dich in diese Stadt geführt?" the german accepted equivalent to the more common english phrase?


              Your sentence is something like "Why have you arrived this city?"

              1. You can't "arrive something" - you need a preposition.

              2. The question is "what", not "why".

              3. The question says nothing about arriving in the city, although it is obviously a related concept.

              4. In the English sentence "What brought you...", the subject is "What" and the object is "you". These correspond to nominative and accusative in German respectively. You hence need to conjugate the verb to "What" rather than "you".


              How would "What did you bring to this city?" translate in comparison?


                Was hast du in diese Stadt gebracht? is one possibility.


                Would "Was haben Sie in diese Stadt gebracht?" work?


                I understand the difference between Perfekt and Präteritum, but without any context here, is there a reason that "Was führte dich in diese Stadt?" is wrong, since the only difference between that and the model right answer is Perfekt v. Präteritum?

                (If the answer is the module, once you are on strengthen, you don't know what module you're in, so that's not helpful.)


                Your "Was führte dich in diese Stadt?" was my answer ........ but was rejected. I would say it is perfectly valid, particularly in a written statement, where the bias towards the perfect tense is dropped. I reported it.


                Warum, bitte, wird :Was brachte dich in diese Stadt ? nicht akzeptiert?


                Shouldn't it be "dieser Stadt" because "in" is a dativ preposition?


                Please see MuratDuranTr's question above


                in is a two-way preposition not exclusively a dative one.


                The suggested version was "Was hat Sie in diese Stadt gebracht?" If so, why wouldn't my "Was hast du in diese Stadt gebracht?" work?


                The subject of the sentence is "what". To mine your firm correct, it needs to start, "Was hat dich..." I believe your confusion is that "Sie" is the same in the nominative and accusative cases, but "du" changes to "dich".


                geführt replace it with gebracht. ty


                Both of those verbs are correct and accepted.


                The dictionary hints are wrong. Can this please be fixed?


                Is it unnatural to say "Was bringt euch zu dieser Stadt"?


                If you write a novel about a time / place where cities still have walls around and the guy at the entrance asks a traveling person before deciding if he lets her inside the city... I'd say then you're right. In our times you use "in diese Stadt" or "nach XY (name of the city)"


                Ich bin der beste Deutsche hier ihr Bauern


                why not " zu diese stadt?"


                "Zu" requires the dative case ("zu dieser Stadt"). Also, using "in" is preferable here since it clarifies that you actually entered the city, rather than just reaching its border.


                I had "Was hat dich in diese Stadt gebracht?" and it was marked wrong. I couldn't fine "geführt" listed as a translation for "brought"


                The verb "führen" means "to lead". So here the literal translation into English is "What has led you to this city?"


                Why isn't "was hat dich zu diese Stadt geführt" accepted?


                1. The dative case is always used after "zu". So "zu diese Stadt" does not work. It would have to be "zu dieser Stadt".
                2. But even "zu dieser Stadt" is probably not the best translation, because in German it suggests that you came up to the city limits but did not actually enter the city.
                3. Bottom line: Go with "in die Stadt".


                Was hat dich hierher verschlagen? Geht das?


                Are you asking if your sentence is a good translation of the English we are given here? It is not. For one thing, the English DL gives us includes the word "city", but your proposed sentence does not.

                Or were you asking rather if your sentence is also an OK German sentence, albeit with a different meaning?


                Being brought anywhere means that there was motion involved, so why must we choose haben here? i thought sein is necessary when the sentence indicates motion.

                "Was ist dich in diese Stadt geführt?" Why is this incorrect?


                Two comments:
                1. Transitive verbs always take "haben". In other words, if the verb has a direct object (here "dich"), you use "haben", not "sein". It is intransitive verbs of motion that take "sein" (walk, drive, etc.)
                2. I see what you mean that "bringing" implies motion. But I think one could argue that the "bringing" per se is not itself the motion. So, for example, I can walk to your house and bring you a cake, I can run to your house and bring you a cake, I can drive to your house and bring you a cake. IMO it is the walking, running, driving, that is the verb of motion. The "bringing" is, in my mind, the cake curled up motionless in my arms. (In any case, note that the verbs of motion in my examples are all intransitive, whereas "bring" has a direct object, the cake.)


                Wieso ist "diese Stadt" nicht in dem Dativ Fall?


                "In" takes the accusative case when it's referring to a destination (going into something from somewhere else). It only takes the dative when it's taking about a location (being within something the whole time).

                Since the city is a destination here (we're taking about coming into the city" from somewhere else), we use the accusative.


                gebraucht was not included in the hints. Of course neither was gefuhrt. So Duo just put all random words in the hints just to purposefully screw everyone up. Nice.....


                gebraucht = used
                gebracht = brought


                Warum hat mir Duo das Wort "verschlagen" anbietet? Yeah! ich kann jetzt Fragen auf Deutsch schreiben. Was fuer ein Forschrit!


                Was hat Dich in diese Stadt verschlagen?

                So wäre es völlig korrektes Deutsch. Aber in der Alltagssprache würde man das nicht benutzen, ausser vielleicht ironisch.

                Ist eher altertümliches Deutsch.

                Ich hoffe, das hilft, auch wenn der post schon 1 Jahr alt ist.

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