1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "There must be a basement."

"There must be a basement."

Translation:Ein Keller muss da sein.

December 21, 2017



The correct translation is "Ein Keller muss da sein.". Instead I wrote "Da muss ein Keller sein" - the same words just different order. Why was my version rejected? The word order is also correct, isn't it?


Your version means something different -- it split up the "verb" da sein (to exist) and so it means not "There must be a basement" but instead "There must be a basement there", i.e. the da now means "there" and refers to a location.

But the English sentence "There must be a basement" does not refer to a location.


Hi Mizinamo I have always taken "da" and "dort" to be interchangeable: but let me test my understanding:- Are you saying that is correct except when "da" is used in "da sein": in which case " da sein" = es gibt = "there is/there are/there exists": and, furthermore, if "da" and "sein" are separated, they lose this meaning?


Something like that, yes.

Also, da can mean "here" when the meaning is "present", as in Tom ist noch nicht da "Tom isn't here yet".


Thanks, Mizinamo. You've caused a penny to drop that, even after half an hour on the subject with my German Teacher, was still firmly lodged!


Is da sein ever written as one word or is it always two?


Is da sein ever written as one word or is it always two?

One word only when it's a noun: Dasein "existence"


"Dort muss ein Keller sein." was not accepted but I think it could be a possible translation


I think not, because there is no "there" to indicate the location in the English sentence.

Dort muss ein Keller sein. / Es muss dort einen Keller geben. would be "There must be a basement there.", in my opinion.


How about "Es muss einen Keller geben." This was accepted, but I would like to know your opinion about how it would sound to a native. Thank you.


Sounds fine to me.


Is there any difference in meaning if we used the "Es gibt" construction? What is more common?


this is a es gibt situation except that we use Es muss....geben here rather es gibt because of modal verb which displaces the main verb (infinitive- geben) to the end. Can anyone confirm this?


Great, thank you


Odd, I answered that too and it was refused.


Native would be: Da muss ein Keller sein. But it was wrong here...


it was wrong because there is no indication of place unlike in your translation which has "da"


No. einen would be accusative, but we need the nominative case for the subject of a verb.


I'm native and I would say 'Es muss einen Keller geben.' There is a lot of sentences that seem to be translated correctly but they aren't used by natives in that translation.

  • 424

That's what I wrote and got marked wrong. I think this one is an error. The given "correct" answers mean, I think, "a basement must be there", like you're pointing at a map or blueprint and working out where the basement would be. The given English phrase "There must be a basement" means more "I am sure a basement must exist", which translates better to "Ein Keller muss da sein", in my opinion.


Yes, indeed. Please report it next time.


Das ist auch richtig. I have translatet too.


Interesting, I would have expected a translation like "Es muss einen Keller geben". Ein Keller muss da sein sounds unnatural, and usually "there is" in the sense of "it exists" is translated with "es gibt". "Da sein" is also possible, but sounds pretty stupid to me in this example. If you actually want to refer to a position with "there", you'd better say "Da muss ein Keller sein". (I see a door, there must be a basement)


"There must be a basement" is not the same as "A basement must be there" (the German translation) in English.


In older, or more poetic, English it might be "A basement there must be," or "A basement must there be." English has transferred this sense of there (not indicating place) to the beginning of the sentence, German still connects it to the verb.


"Ein Keller muss da sein" would be just as clumsy as "a basement must exist". I would mark it wrong (I am a native speaker and teaching German)


Since "es gibt" is 'there is', would "es musst einen Keller geben" not also work?


Since "es gibt" is 'there is', would "es musst einen Keller geben" not also work?

Nearly -- the verb form is wrong.

es muss (no -t). (memory aid: just like "it must" has no -s)


Would would the difference be between Es muss da einen Keller geben and Ein Keller muss da sein??

Also, can they both mean It is necessary for a basement to be there, as well as I'm sure there is a basement there?


Also, can they both mean It is necessary for a basement to be there, as well as I'm sure there is a basement there?


I'd say that Es muss da einen Keller geben is the more natural-sounding of the two.


Isn't this a "gibt es" situation?

I was taught "there is" = "es gibt."

"Es muss einen Keller geben?"


because the "muss" is added, I guess.


''Da muss ein Keller sein''. Was ist die unterschied zwischen meine Antwort und Duos antwort?? ?????????


mizinamo already answered above: ‘da sein’ is seen as a unit, if you split the two components the sentence's meaning shifts to ‘a basement must be there’ (as opposed to the original ‘there must be a basement’), that is, ‘da’ becomes an indication of location rather than mere existence.

As general advice: please read the other comments (especially in comment sections as short as this one) before posting a question, the answer can often be found there.


I'm ignorant and would appreciate an education. I wrote "es gibt müsst ein Keller sein." What is wrong with that?

  • 424

The modal always follows the subject, and the verb gets moved to the end in infinitive form. So "I eat meat" : "Ich esse Fleisch" vs "I must eat meat" : "Ich muss Fleisch essen". In this case, the "gibt" should be moved to the end and changed to "geben".


"Ein Keller muss da sein" klingt sehr holprig. "Da muss (doch) ein Keller sein" wäre schon deutlich natürlicher. Die Übersetzung "There must be a basement there" kann man zwar nachvollziehen, ist aber doch stark an den Haaren herbeigezogen

"Ein Keller muss da sein" sounds very bumpy. "Da muss (doch) ein Keller sein" would be much more natural. One can understand the translation "There must be a basement there", but that is far-fetched


I would write: "Da muss ein Keller sein". "Ein Keller muss da sein" sounds weird.


See the exchange above that I had with Mizinamo


Es muss ein Keller da sein.

would anyone teach me why this is wrong?


To beagoodone.

I'd have said that this is not wrong. In the essential fact that you have not separated "da" and "sein", as argued above, it should mean the same thing. It may just be that it is not yet in DL's database.


"Da muss ein Keller sein" ist auch richtig !!!


Hi Doro. Sorry, no. That is not right. This is dealt with above. The separation of "da" and "sein" changes the meaning. Your sentence means "There must be a cellar there".


? I wrote "Es muss einen Keller geben." Duo said: "You have a typo. Ein Keller muss da sein." ??


So is Dort gibt es einen Keller possible?


So is Dort gibt es einen Keller possible?

As a German sentence, yes.

As a translation of "There must be a basement", no.


I wrote, "Es muss ein Keller sein" but it was rejected. Why?


I wrote, "Es muss ein Keller sein" but it was rejected. Why?

Because that means "It has to be a cellar" and not "There has to be a cellar".

Your sentence talks about an "it" and states that that "it" is a cellar. It doesn't talk about the mere existence of a cellar.

es ist ... can only describe the existence of something if you specify a location, e.g. es ist ein Buch auf dem Tisch "there is a book on the table".

But if someone is asking you what you see and you say, "Well, there's a book", you can't say es ist ein Buch (without a location). You'd have to say something like es gibt ein Buch or es ist ein Buch dort (there is a book there).


Eigentlich ist das Idiom , aber das Modalverb "muss(müssen)" wird danach zugenommen , deshalb muss man "Es muss [Akk.] geben(=Inf.)" schreiben. Erzähle ich richtig??


There is no there there...easy mnemonic...


Duo has provided an incorrect translation. Duo's German sentence translates as "A celler must be there."


why is it, einen in es muss einen Keller geben but ein in da muss ein Keller sein

is it because of sein which takes Nominative on both sides


"Da muss ein Keller sein" sounds a bit odd. Sounds to me as if something could just sit in a corner of the room and just "be". Weird as that. The same structure can be used if it was another verb. For example; "Es gibt Zeiten, da muss ein Mann kämpfen" (a quote from the internet). Depends on the verb. One just can't "only be". That's why it's odd.


Why not da muss ein keller sein


Please read the other comments.

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