1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Sollst du schon wieder koche…

"Sollst du schon wieder kochen?"

Translation:Are you supposed to cook again?

April 19, 2018



What is the function of "schon" in this sentence?


The word schon is called a particle and is often used to add 'flavour' to a sentence (it has some other functions too). It's hard to get an idea for its usage without being exposed to conversation in German. Literally, it means "already". But here as a phrase schon wieder is something slightly exasperated like "AGAIN?!".


Already is a good translation in this example. Schon wieder indicates that something is done again after a short period of time or a high number of repetitions before.


So, the English translation doesn't do it justice. It seems to me that, "Are you supposed to cook again, already", would:

1) Translate all the words

2) Convey the meaning of the original German

3) Use both languages colloquially

4) Teach us to speak German


If you had tried different tone inflections which occur in different contexts like they do in English, you would have come across the context for it. (Puzzled sound) And then lo and behold the word 'already' fits right. I'm calling it: Tonal Justice .


Watch you're tone young man! lolol


I wrote "Are you already supposed to cook again?" and it did not accept it.

I understand that German has modal particles with no direct translation, but I thought that translating the "schon" particle would help to translate the sentiment of the sentence better

Am I wrong?


I said "...yet again?" and it was rejected, but I think that's the general neighborhood of what's being expressed, so I reported it.


Same here, I reported.


In that case it's not clear if the English translation given is good. If I cook today and am supposed to cook again next month, then it's fair to ask if I'm supposed to cook again. But if I just finished, and I indicate that I will start cooking in a minute, someone might ask if I'm already supposed to cook again.

Is "are you supposed to cook again" really a good translation? It seems as if "Are you supposed to cook yet again" is closer in meaning.


So it is pretty much the same with опять vs снова in Russian (снова = wieder, опять = schon wieder)


Since Duolingo specifically states that it is not teaching Modal Particles, isn't it misleading to include one in a German sentence, especially since schon has a meaning on it's own, that is not included in the English translation?


Duo's translation does nothing to capture the essence of "schon", then, and should imho be amended to convey the effect of "schon" here.

Additionally if Duo wants to teach us these "flavor particles" it would be really quite helpful to do so in a specific unit, as currently you only encounter them once in a blue moon, which makes learning/memorizing them unnecessarily difficult, especially since you also see them used in their more "normal" (?) sense, making it rather difficult to identify exactly when they're there only to 'flavor' the sentence.

(Best that I can tell is they're sometimes used 'normally', sometimes for 'flavor', and I have no idea how I am supposed to tell when they're being used which way.)


So shouldn't it be "Are you supposed to already cook again?" or "Are you supposed to cook again, already?" or "Should you cook again already?" or "Should you already cook again?" etc?


Is it ok if you don't use it?


Question about 'Sollen' - in a lot of sentences Duolingo translates it as 'supposed to' rather than 'should'. I feel like there's a big difference in meaning between these; 'supposed to' suggests an outside force making you do it or adhering to rules, whereas 'should' implies that you may be doing it out of your own desire.

"Are you supposed to cook again? The boss was really unclear!"

"Should you cook again? It was really nice last time!"

Does 'Sollen' work in both these ways and determined by context? Or does it have a tendency towards meaning one or the other?


So I read it as "should you already cook again?" rather than "Are you supposed to already cook again" - why is the former incorrect?


Looking only at the grammar, "should" corresponds to "solltest" in German, while "sollst" would be literally "shall". If you ask "Should you [..]?", to me it sounds like asking someone if he thinks it would be a good idea that he cooks again, while the German sentence asks whether someone else wants him/her to cook again. Am I wrong?


Duo doesn't seem to accept translations with "shall" either, though.


"Are you supposed to be cooking again" marked wrong. Correction says "Are you supposed to cook again". Isnt it the same thing?


I was also marked wrong for this. Yes, our answers mean exactly the same as the 'proper' translation. It's yet another example of inconsistency of the 'I walk/I am walking' type. I've raised several, but none ever get fixed.


So, according to the MOD, az_p, "Are you already supposed to cook again?" should be accepted.


I put "Should you cook again already" and it was accepted.


Are you supposed to cook yet again??, Why is no yet in the English translation??


Why is 'are you again supposed to cook?' not accepted?


That is an awkward way to word it and wouldn't be said by an English speaker.


i was expecting "Should you cook once again" to work


Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed.


why is it incorrect to translate the German as, "Should you be cooking again?"?


I agree it should, esecially as Shawn's version above was accepted, and yours sounds more natural.


Does Duo accept any translations with "should" or "shall"?

All of the ones I tried got rejected.


Can I use doch instead of schon here


Speaking as an englishman, it seems to me that "Should you cook again now?" Captures the flavour of the german sentence (no pun intended), however I was marked wrong.

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