"Du wirst alles wissen."
Translation:You will know everything.
59 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Why would "shall" be better English? "Shall" is very formal and, in some situations, even comical, sounding overly old-fashioned. "Will" works much better here. "You will know everything" or "you'll know everything" make more sense here, as there's nothing to suggest that it's "you shall know everything."
I and we shall, everybody else will. BUT, if you wish to place emphasis on it (it really will happen), you can reverse them. So I will is more emphatic than I shall and therefore also you shall instead of you will. As in: You shall go to the ball. As German doesn't have this distinction, both should be correct. However, will is definitely the 'first' answer.
Wouldn't Ihr werdet wissen suffice for that? As I currently understand things, your sentence looks like "You (all) will know it all".
Adding es alle in the position that you did to clarify that Ihr means not just "you (some people in a group)" but "you (all people in a group)" is not something I have encountered so far while learning German, so I am curious.
Ihr werdet wissen = You (plural) will know.
It does not really include the information "all". "You all" is just a way to make the distinction of you (singular) and you (plural) visible in English.
"alle" refers to ihr; Ihr alle = you all.
It does NOT refer to everything (or as you wrote "it all"). That would be alles.
So why did I also include an "es"? Because "Ihr alle werdet wissen" is not a complete sentence in German. You need an object for the verb wissen, namely what you all will know. So my sentence actually means "you will all know it."
Why not "Ihr werdet alle es wissen"?
Isn't the object of 'wissen' 'es', because you 'know it'? Also the fact that it's 'alle' and not 'alles' should tell the listener that 'alle' isn't the object of 'werdet' which can't actually take an object anyway? In english 'alle' would go in the second place but the verb has to in German so should it not be third? I read what you said under and it was very helpful, but I don't believe that you've said why it's 'es alle' and not the other way around.
i've been confused about how to end "alle-" in different sentences such as this. I notice over at sakasiru's comment "ihr wedet es alle wissen" it is "es alle" and not as duo's sentence "alles" .. but i feel i might have also seen other endings such as "aller"? when to use what?
does that then mean that a german phrase of "alle- (neuter noun)" is then both "alles" as well as the stand alone noun "everything"? is "alles" as "everything" then capitalized as opposed to it's adjective usage which is not?
plus i still don't understand it in sakasiru's comment.. as it is not a adjective preceding a noun nor is it the noun 'everything'.. I don't understand what it's function is exactly.. it seems to be describing all the possible "it"s (es) that can be "known" (wissen) but what function is the word "all" then in that context? adverb? preposition?
i am talking about that only in the sense that "alle- (neuter noun)" being "alles" is a form of declension.. specifically it could be strong or mixed declension in nominative or accusative cases.. but no I am referencing how the appearance of that declension would then be the same as the word everything which you say is also alles. and further asking would it then be capitalized as a noun?
as for the sakasiru's comment part that more pertained to the concept of "all" and what type of purpose it serves in that sentence but i figured it out. i saw it relates to "it" but wondered what type of grammar was occurring there? why did it follow the word it (es) instead of precede it? why does it follow the declension pattern ending in -e? i see now from your link though that it might be called an adjectival pronoun. the sentence is accusative i take from the "will know" (werdet wissen) and then the reason it ends in -e is because the "it" that it references is actually plural ... all the possible its that can be known. tricky.
Edit: Indeed the following link by smithmks does answer the question. It is an issue of whether or not the noun is countable. If it cannot be countable then alle is used refering to a plural object. Thank you!