AFAIK, laufen basically means "to travel by foot" (as well as "to flow", "to run" (as in a computer program), "to be in progress" etc), so I think "to walk" would, in some situations, be accurate. However, it also seems to imply at least a certain swiftness, and so in this case "to run" or "to jog" (rather than, say, spazieren which would mean "to walk leisurely" or "to stroll"). Of course I'm not exactly an authority on the subject.
I know its tempting to associate run with rennen, but from my experience, rennen is jogging. Laufen is walking, and even if you say you're going out for a run, people will say "Ich gehe laufen". Spazieren/gehen/laufen/rennen. Those are the verbs and there's no 100% clear concensus on how they should be used. For every ten people that said X, I found just as many swearing by Z. So... Google and know you are not alone in this.
I assume by "connectives" you mean conjunctions.
This only happens with "subordinating conjunctions", which are conjunctions which connect two clauses together in such a way that one relies upon (i.e. is "subordinate" to) the other. In German, when a clause is "subordinated" the verb(s) go(es) to the end; in this case "wir sind müde" becomes "wir müde sind". The clause is "subordinate" because it relies upon the "main" clause for it to make sense or elaborates on the information in the main clause. "We are tired" makes sense on it's own, but "Although we are tired" does not, so "although" (obwohl) is a subordinating conjunction. The subordinating conjunctions are: als, bevor, bis, da, damit, dass, ehe, falls, indem, nachdem, ob, obgleich, obschon, obwohl, seit(dem), so dass, während, weil and wenn. However, I wouldn't worry too much about learning the list as their meaning is usually enough to figure it out and they are more-or-less equivalent to English's subordinating conjunctions.
Coordinating conjugations (such as und) and correlative conjunctions (e.g. weder … noch) don't subordinate either clause and so don't change the word order. If this sentence were changed to "Wir laufen und wir sind müde" ("We're running and we're tired") neither clause would be subordinate so the verb-second word order is retained; this makes sense as und merely joins two pieces of information, it doesn't imply that one is related to the other (although it may be).
P.S. I'm not sure whether the und sentence needs a comma.
@jak1583 : I think it's because the second part is a subordinate clause. See http://german.about.com/library/weekly/aa010910a.htm
I can't think of a reason why it would ever go there unless you were asking a question*; even then I don't think it would go there in this instance since it is the second verb. If German worked like English you'd expect it to go after the „wir“, not after the „obwohl“. I believe it goes at the end of the sentence here because it is the second verb in the sentence.
*there may well be one that I haven't come across yet in my studies, but I'm not aware of one.
Back when we learned about conjunctions, we learned that when we have two clauses like this, if the 2nd clause starts with a conjunction, then the verb is placed at the end of the sentence. Sind is the verb in the 2nd clause.
However, if you rearrange the sentence to say "Although we are tired, we run". You would write "Obwohl wir sind mude, laufen mir". So in that case, if the conjunction is in the first clause, then the second one has the word order switched so that the verb is first instead of at the end.
"Even if" doesn't make sense in English here. It would imply that "we" will (potentially) become tired in the future, while the rest of the sentence is in the past tense. To work with "even if", it'd have to be something like "We will/are going to keep running even if we are tired".
I disagree with the other reply, which claims that "even if" wouldn't make sense . However, it would mean something different. "although" states as a fact that we are tired, while "even if" leaves it unknown or unspecified. As for which of these is a better fit for "obwohl", that's a question that I can't answer with certainty.
Yes, that does sound wrong. In a dependent clause, the verb always goes last. Even if you reverse the sentence, "sind" goes last in the clause:
"Obwohl wir müde sind, laufen wir."
Note that the verb "laufen" in the main clause always goes "second"--you have to have that in the right place first. Don't worry, with practice it all becomes second nature. :)
Is "obwohl" closer to "even though" or "although"?
In case people don't see the difference, I think that when the... um... subordinate (?) clause comes second, "even though" can often put more emphasis on the prevailing nature of the dominant (?) clause (the clause not containing "even though"), while "although" can sometimes put emphasis on its contradiction to the dominant clause. Consider:
- I love her, even though she gets on my nerves sometimes. and
- I love her, although she gets on my nerves sometimes.
I hope I'm not the only one who interprets these sentences slightly different. It would depend on context and tone, of course. And when the subordinate clause comes first, I think they both emphasize the prevailing nature of the dominant clause.
I'm not sure I understand. 1. and 2. are the same thing. Although is the same thing as even though.
I try to think, EVEN THOUGH my brain is clogged.
I try to think, ALTHOUGH my brain is clogged.
No difference. Both mean that you're doing a verb, but there's something trying to stop you from doing whatever verb you're doing (e.g. I love her = verb you're doing. She gets on my nerves sometimes = trying to stop you from loving her.) I guess your 'emphasis' problem sort of makes sense, and if I were to guess, 'obwhol' would be better translated as 'although'.
"However" doesn't capture the sense of "despite the fact that we were tired" that "although" or "even though" do. With "however" you'd have to reverse the sentence to retain the meaning (something like "We were tired; however, we kept running"), but then the emphasis would be shifted, so it wouldn't be a very good translation as part of the original would be lost/changed.
Hi! We can’t use “despite” here because despite is a
preposition— it can only be followed by a noun, not by a whole clause (subject + verb).
“Despite her illness, she continued to work.”
“We continued the game despite the weather.”
Does that help? If not, respond and I will try again.
Commas are compulsory for forms of direct address in English, as well. So if you are speaking directly to Anna, there must be a comma before and after Anna in the sentence: "Hello, Anna, how are you?"
In any case, no--what is old-fashioned and stiff in one language does not have any influence on another language. For as many similarities as there might be, they evolve separately.
For example, nouns weren't traditionally capitalized in Old High German, Middle High German, or [modern] High German, but around the turn of the 20th century, there was some kind of nationalist movement that advocated for capitalized nouns that eventually won out. This is completely independent from the capitalized nouns we sometimes see in older Modern English (such as in the US Constitution).
German is pretty structured, and commas are required between main and subordinate clauses. This is just the way it is, and it's better to focus on recognizing this than worrying about how it might be optional in English.
Tell me again the difference between "even if" and "even though", because I can't understand it
“Even if” is hypothetical in its concept; that situation may or may not actually exist. “You must be at work even if you are sick.” “Even if we run, we cannot catch that train.” It doesn’t matter if you are sick, and it doesn’t matter if we run or don’t run— you still have to be at work, and we still cannot catch the train.
“Even though” is basically the same as “although”; it presents a contrast. Even though she studied hard, she failed the exam. Even though it is late April, the weather is still cold.
It’s a structure difference. The word “despite” is a preposition, so it has to be followed by nouns: despite the rain, despite the high cost, despite her wishes, despite the fact that....
To introduce a whole clause, we need to use a subordinator such as though / although / even though. “We’re running even though we are tired.”
It depends how you worded it. Nevertheless isn't used in the same way as even though etc. Even though is a conjunction which connects two clauses together. Nevertheless is an adverb and is usually used at the beginning of a clause/sentence. To form a phrase using nevertheless that means the same as "We are running even though we are tired" would I think either require two separate sentences or two clauses connected with a semi-colon. For example: "We are tired; nevertheless, we are running." This is not particularly natural/idiomatic English and nevertheless is intrinsically a bit outdated and fairly formal. Also, while it is an accurate translation of the German in that it conveys the correct meaning the fact that it is structured completely differently means it changes the emphasis etc. (TL;DR: While you can form a correct translation using nevertheless I wouldn't recommend it.)
Read the other comments, particularly the replies to jak1583's and Strato79's comments. In a nutshell, ...obwohl wir müde sind is a so-called subordinate or dependent clause* and in German all verbs (in this case sind) in a subordinate/dependent clause go to the end.
*In other words it cannot exist on its own and be a sentence. You cannot simply say "Even though we are tired" because the even though requires extra information from the main clause, which is missing. Hence it is said to be dependent on or subordinate to the main clause.
trotz is a preposition and comes before a noun; obwohl is a conjunction and comes before an entire clause with a verb.
trotz is a bit like "despite" -- you can say "despite the rain" but not "despite it was raining" or "despite we were tired".
If you wanted to use trotz, you could use trotz der Tatsache, dass... (despite the fact that...).
Duo says the conjunction moves the verb to the end of the sentence but 'sind' is not A verb. Why has it moved to the end and in the previous question 'er ist suss' changed to 'ist er suss'. I thought 'ist er suss' meant 'is he suss?' Why is this and how do you know which word order is correct if there is no verb. Also in the case of 'er ist suss' changing to 'ist er suss' how would you ask the question 'is he sweet?'.
Sind (sein/to be) is a verb in both English and German.
The verb in this sentence is moved to the end by the conjunction obwohl (although technically, it's more correct to say that the verb is moved to the end of the clause because it's a subordinate clause).
In simple German sentences, verbs belong in the second position in the sentence:
Ich gehe morgen im Park.
Morgen gehe ich im Park.
Gestern bin ich im Park gegangen. (note the verb bin/sein again)
In a simple question, the verb and subject are swapped:
Gehe ich morgen im Park?
Bin ich gestern im Park gegangen?
Likewise, to ask if someone is sweet, you would ask "Ist er suß?"
In sentences with subordinate clauses, the verb in the clause goes at the end, and the subordinate clause takes up one "position" in the sentence.
I'll eat lunch after I go to the park:
Ich esse Mittagessen, nachdem ich im Park gehe.
After I go to the park, I'll eat lunch:
Nachdem ich im Park gehe, esse ich Mittagessen.
It's very regular and consistent. It just takes a little practice.
Grammatically you are right, but no German would use your sentences like this. I would say: "Ich gehe morgen im Park spazieren" or "Ich gehe morgen in den Park." Likewise: Ich esse zu Mittag , nachdem ich im Park spazieren gegangen bin/nachdem ich in den Park gegangen bin." (The walking in the park is finished.)
thanks for your help, it kinda makes sense however I am struggling with the word order changes in this section, but I couldn't get used to die/der/das/den at first but soon learn't so as you say it just takes A little (or in my case A lot) of practice, which is is exactly why I'm doing this course.
True, the concept is similar— but “despite” is a preposition, and it has to be followed by a noun or noun phrase, not by a whole clause with a subject and verb.
We are running despite the bad weather. We are running despite our tiredness. We are running despite the rain.
But: We are running
although the weather is bad /...
although we are tired/
even though it is raining.
Obwohl is a subordinate conjunction and behaves like “although”/“even though” rather than despite.
If we translate it “...we run,” then you’re saying that this is a
routine or habitual action because that is how English simple present is used. For example: “Every day at 0500 we have to do physical training. Even though we are tired, we run.”
If we translate it as “...we are running,” then it means the action is occurring
right now, continuing in the present moment. “ We’re late for school, so we have to hurry. Even though we are tired, we are running.”
Therefore, you can translate it both ways— run, are running— but the meaning isn’t the same.
Hi! You might want to scroll up to the beginning of the thread and read the discussions and answers about that— it’s been brought up numerous times.
[The quick version: Because that clause/ that half of the sentence begins with a subordinate conjunction, obwohl, the verb moves to the end of the clause.]
This lesson drives me crazy. My German teacher and most reliable sources on the internet say that conjunctions DO NOT affect the placement of the verbs. German sentence structure is actually much more flexible than that. If this annoys you too, please report the questions that do not accept your right answer.