1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Sie wird auf dich warten."

"Sie wird auf dich warten."

Translation:She will wait for you.

June 3, 2013



Wait for = await = warten auf.

Please let go of "wait on" and "warten für". It's not helping your English or German. Just let go.


Thanks for mentioning await. That will make this easier for me.


To "wait on" and "wait for" can mean exactly the same thing in English. "She will wait on you" is every bit as correct a translation in this case.


Yes, however wait on is also commonly used for serving someone in American English. It is less common to use to replace wait for. Possibly they were trying to keep it less vague.

Though I would still report it.


'Wait on' and wait for' do not mean exactly the same in Standard English. Some people say 'wait on' and mean 'wait for', but that is slang (which they have every right to use).


Agreed. Report it as being a correct answer.


Yes. One of the meanings of "wait on" is the same as the meaning of "wait for". But: Considering that “to wait on” also has a secondary meaning of “to act as an attendant to”, usually as a waiter in a restaurant, whereas “to wait for” is unambiguous, I recommend to avoid the use of “wait on” in the sense of “await” altogether... source


Does this mean "wait for" or "wait on" (the one that means to wait on someone like a waiter or servant, not the one that some people use to mean "wait for".) Can it mean both?


Why isnt this phrase accepted? > "She will be waiting for you"


Strictly speaking, "She will be waiting for you" is the future continuous tense, not simple future. Simple future is an event that occurs once in the future. Future continuous is an ongoing event. It's a pretty obscure distinction that I (for one) don't pay much attention to.


You seem to be saying that Andffil's translation uses an aspect which does not match with the German Sie wird auf dich warten.

My understanding is that continuous aspects do not exist in German verbs.

As such either the English simple or continuous aspects are both valid translations.

I think Andffil's translation is therefore correct, but my German is far from perfect; is there something I don't know which is relevant here?


Duo is trying to tell us single guys something


What's up with the word order?


When there are 2 verbs in a phrase, the main one is placed at the final position and the auxiliary one is placed at the beginning.


Maybe a bit simple, but: why is it "auf dich" and not "auf dir"?

Auf is a two-way preposition, which means that this sentence must involve some sort of crossing of a barrier/movement from one place to another in order to trigger accusative case, yes?

Except I don't see that here. She's standing in a spot, his location is unknown?


Auf is a two-way preposition, which means that this sentence must involve some sort of crossing of a barrier/movement from one place to another in order to trigger accusative case, yes?


The construction auf ... warten always requires the accusative case, even though no movement is involved.

Just something you have to learn.

With two-way prepositions, metaphorical (non-locational) uses often seem to involve the accusative: auf jemanden warten, über jemanden sprechen, an jemanden denken, sich an jemanden erinnern, ....


The construction auf ... warten always requires the accusative case

So....is it a separable verb? Or is it just a specific prepositional phrase construction that has its own special rules for...fun?


So....is it a separable verb?

No. It's not jemandem aufwarten (that's a completely different verb).

Or is it just a specific prepositional phrase construction that has its own special rules

Well, as I said, metaphorical uses often seem to use the accusative with two-way prepositions. So it's not that special.


But...waiting for someone isn't metaphorical? I mean, it can be, but you can also literally stand in a spot and wait for someone. Does that change whether it's accusative or not?


You are not waiting "on top of someone" nor "onto the top of someone".

auf is not used in its literal, location-related meaning "on(to)".

It's used in a metaphorical usage to indicate the target of the waiting.


Ah, so it's metaphorical in the German usage, even though the English usage isn't strictly metaphorical. Got it.


Is it correct to say ,,Sie wird warten auf dich''?


No, the conjugated form of the verb does go in second position, but the rest of the verb goes to the end. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~deutsch/Grammatik/WordOrder/WordOrder.html


why "She will wait you" is wrong?


In English you need a word between 'wait' and 'you', e.g. for or on - 'wait you' is not correct.


You could say "She will await you." otherwise it would be "She will wait for you." (with some people using "She will wait on you." to mean the same thing, but unfortunately that could also be confusing her with a waitress from the regular meaning of "wait on".)


Sie wird für dich warten. should'nt it be correct too ??



No, you cannot translate word for word from one language to another. In English we use "wait for" in German they use "warten auf".


Why not fur instead of auf


Why not fur instead of auf

There is no word fur in German.

And für with umlaut would simply be the wrong preposition to use with warten in German.

(If you can't type für, then write fuer -- but do not simply leave out the dots.)


Sie=she sie=they only difference is the capital "S"?


Capital s in "Sie" is for " you" formal version, but "she" and "they" are both without capital "sie" unless it is capitalized at the beginning of the sentence. Then you should look at the conjugation of the verb "Sie wird...." can only be "She will..." and "Sie werden..." could be either "They will..." or formal "You will..." . http://german.about.com/library/anfang/blanfang02.htm Pronouns http://german.about.com/library/verbs/blverb03.htm Werden


What is the difference between Sie = She and Sie = They. They will wait for you is not correct.


You can tell that "Sie" in this context is neither "they" nor the "polite/formal you" by the verb. If this sentence were "They will . . . ." then it would be "Sie werden . . . . ". One would also say "Sie werden . . . " if one were saying "You will . . . " in a polite/formal setting, such as speaking to a stranger or your superior/boss.

The polite you will always be capitalized in all its declined forms: Sie, Ihnen, Ihr, . . . . . When "Sie" is the first word of a sentence, however, one must rely on the conjugation of the verb and/or context to distinguish between her, they, or You. Sometimes, the they-vs-You will be ambiguous.


Why is it not: They will wait for you ??


Because the verb form is wrong for that -- "they will wait" is sie werden warten with werden rather than wird.


I have heard that the word order in a sentence is flexible in German. If that is so, can this sentence be written as "Sie wird warten auf dich" as in English? If not, why?


Word order is flexible within limits but not completely free.

The infinitive warten has to come at the end, for example, and wird has to be the second item in the sentence.

So in this sentence, you can only choose the order of sie and auf dich.


Didn't read the earlier comments. Dumb me


"Warten auf" vs "warten an"?


auf jemanden warten is to wait for someone -- to wait until the person arrives.

warten an is not a fixed collocation; it just has the literal meaning of "wait at", e.g. an einem Baum warten "to wait at/by a tree".


'She will for you wait'.


'She will for you wait'.

That is neither correct English nor is it a literal translation from the German (that would be "she becomes onto you wait").

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