Most German accents are 'non-rhotic', that is the r at the end of a word or syllable is not pronounced. This is also the case in most english accents from England, Australia, New Zealand and other places, while most American, Canadian as well as Scottish, Welsh and Irish accents are rhotic (ie the 'r' in 'water' and 'hard' is pronounced). So yes, the "r" sound should be missing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rhotic_accents http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rhotic_accents#Other_Germanic_languages
Hmm, do Illinois accents count as rhotic? I'm surprised that American accents are considered rhotic, but all I really know is the accent spoken by my relatives in Illinois, in which the 'r' at the end is very faintly pronounced. But then I suppose as a Scot, most 'r's seem weakly pronounced, so maybe it's perspective that's throwing me off :P
P.S. I'll need to visit Balamb again soon - it's been too many years ;)
I have no idea about American accents or geography - is Illinois somewhere near the red regions in the map? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Non_rhotic-whites-usa.png Otherwise, it's apparently rhotic! If you compare how a word like 'butter' is said in standard English accent vs standard American accent you'd hear the difference...let's see....http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/butter_1 :-P
Well most verbs put the subject into the accusative case rather than the dative case, and "lesen" (which is conjugated here as "liest") puts the subject (the thing the action is done to, ie the newspaper that is being read) in the accusative case.
Here, the newspaper is the direct receiver of the action of reading, so it's accusative.
Yeah it's tricky and I'm a beginner as well, by all means. I just remember which case each verb forces (usually it's accusative).
If it's the "direct receiver" of an action, it's accusative. This is the thing that the action is being to. The "indirect receiver" of an action is dative. This is the thing that something is done to as a consequence of an action.
For example, "Ich gebe dem Mann ein Pferd" (I give the man a horse). The thing you are giving is the horse, and therefore accusative because it is the one the action is performed on. The person you are giving to is the man, and therefore he's in the dative case. He is given a horse as a consequence of you doing the action of giving. You are not giving the man are you? You're giving to the man.
Sometimes a verb can force either dative or accusative (such as geben where the thing being given is accusative, and the thing being given to is dative.) I usually just make a mental note of it.
Sorry I can't offer a very in-depth explanation. There was a website with a good explanation of it that had diagrams that explained it really clearly, but I can't find it. Maybe if someone else out there knows the one I'm talking about they could link it for you.
I often get it wrong myself but I'm getting better at recognising when to use one or the other. Just practice and you should start to see the logic behind it after a while.
It's the same - there's no real distinction. If you wanted to emphasise that it's specifically one paper that's being read, and not more, you'd just stress ‘eine’, and the context of the conversation would make it clear. Many languages don't have the distinction of ‘a’ vs. ‘one’ that English has.
German Video with German English subtitles and play game : https://german.yabla.com/player_cdn.php?id=1119&tlang_id=en
You're a bit mixed up there :) Those are three different verbs: "let" (past tense, misspelled), "read", "teach".
P.S. The abbreviation is etc.
Because the single word "a" is not a translation of the entire sentence Die Person liest eine Zeitung.
What was the entire sentence that you typed?
(Often, the problem is with the word order or with the form of an accompanying article or adjective rather than with the word you think might be the problem... but that's impossible to diagnose if you won't tell us what you typed, since nobody can see that.)