I agree with the fellow who says it doesn´t make sense to highlight a single word, considering it´s a part of composed verb. Besides, the reasonable explanation I found out was the following : Erkennen = Recognize smth/sby (which you don´t know yet). Wiedererkennen = Recognize smth/sby you already had a previous knowledge, even though it´s not translated literally in English.
thank you for that, but i still don't get erkennen, can you give me an example of when I would use it? thanks
Ich hatte mit Angelina Jolie zwanzig Minuten lang gesprochen aber ich hatte sie gar nicht erkannt. Wie peinlich!
Ich habe Angst, dass ich meinen Neffe am Bahnhoff nicht wiedererkennen werde. Ich habe ihn nicht seit zehn Jahren getroffen.
In the second sentence we realise the speaker could at some point in the past recognise his nephew. The person who met Angelina Jolie would not have recognised herhad this happened at any time. Anyway the default is to use erkennen, just add a wieder- when there is an "any more" concept
Thank you for the informational reply! What other programs or methods do you use to help you learn German?
Great explanation. But it is "meinen Neffen", as Neffe is a weak noun: it receives an -(e)n in the plural and the singular forms (except for NOM sing.).
This is all well and good, but since the given sentence is a negation, it makes no sense (to me) to use the wiedererkennen form.
I put exactly this, but added "again" at the end because of wieder. Why is that wrong and what is wieder doing there then?
But what's the difference between erkennen and wiedererkennen, don't both mean recognize?
Thanks. Because "Wieder" alone is highlighted as a new word it obscures the fact that it's a prefix to wiedererkennen
Yes, but shouldn't nicht go after erkenne to really be 'not recognize'? Having nicht after Hemd is odd and puts emphasis on the shirt, does it not?
I believe the opposite of what you are thinking is what really happens in German. (It seems that only the verb "sein", "to be", follows the logic by which the negation particle is attached to the verb.)
If you say "Ich mag nicht dieses Hemd" you are emphasizing the last part of the sentence ("I don't like THIS shirt, can't you see which one? Are you blind?")
However, I am not a native German speaker. That's only what I think at the moment. :-D
An (accepted) English translation which contains the sense of having once recognized the shirt is: "I no longer recognize this shirt."
From the comments, I understand that wieder is part of erkenne. However, usually when DL introduces split verbs they mention it in the drop-down translation of the word (as erkenne...wieder). It didn't do so this time and I think that's where everyone's confusion stems from. Is it similar to "could have recognized" or am I way off?
'I dont recongize this shirt again'? Warum nicht, ich denke das ist richtig
Duolingo translate "weider" as "again" but now defines it as anymore. It makes sense in the context but it would be helpful to have fuller defintions of new words.
I don't recognize this shirt anymore
That worked for me. So I recognize it in some point of time, but not anymore. That's how i get it erkenne + wieder
What's the use of 'wieder' here? Since it has no role to play in this sentence.
the verb is wiedererkennen and is seperable so wieder must go to the end of the sentence.
It means "to recognise again" as in "would you recognise the pickpocket again"
I answered "I recognize this shirt no longer" which is just an inversion of "I no longer recognize this shirt" and it was marked wrong. Would my answer make sense here?