The rules changed just before I learned German, so for example I want to write "er ißt" instead of "er isst". If you know that ß = ss, you'll be able to read anything, and with a 1998 or later dictionary at hand, you'll be able to write "properly". But the rules are:
- ß is used after diphthongs (beißen [ˈbaɪ̯sən] ‘to bite’))
- ß is used after long vowels (grüßen [ˈɡʀyːsən] ‘to greet’)
- ss is used after short vowels (küssen [ˈkʰʏsən] ‘to kiss’)
More curious (and maybe interesting, hehe) information can be found at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F#Current_usage_in_German
Note the difference thought is the -e at the end of the verb, which is not part of this question's sentence.
On a side note of how this might be actually said, I always imagine this statement as an answer to a question. Q-What happens if walks instead of runs? A-He misses the bus. Is that a valid use of the sentence, "Er verpaßt den Bus?"
Because being nostaligic is "vermissen". "Verpassen" is something entirely different. Even if "verpasst" did mean that, past tense still would be wrong. This verb is present tense, and in English can only be translated as present perfect or present progressive, and the only exceptions would be if there were a time marker. (There is no time marker, so it can only be interpreted as present tense.)
I understand you questioning this, artese. "He misses the bus." is such immediate present tense you would almost never have reason to say it that way in English. It's like "He is missing the bus right now, as we speak." Duolingo's English translation does make it sound more like "he fondly misses the days when he used to take the bus..."
A better definition for verpassen is to not take part in. That nicely captures one of the meanings of miss in English without the confusion of the sense of longing possibly being included.
It also makes it easier to avoid falling into the much more common tense of miss in English. He is not taking part in using the bus doesn't sound as conflicted as saying he is missing the bus.
Not to mention that saying someone is missing the bus or meal or whatever in English is automatically taken to mean the subject didn't want or expect that to happen, unless context is present to indicate otherwise. Verpassen is more neutral about the intent of the subject.
Basic construction of a sentence is subject + verb. The subject is Nominativ and is usually a noun, the person/place/thing, that is acting in the manner described by the verb, e.g.:
The man sees. Oder: der Mann sieht.
To build a more interesting sentence, have the man see something. That thing is a direct object. Das ist, auf Deutch, der Akkusativ.
Der Mann sieht den Bus.
I used "sees" instead of "misses" in my example here because "the man misses," seems more incomplete. It's begging for a direct object, so much so that it seems wrong. But it's the same concept/analysis.
Yes.. because it implies that he previously owned the bus.. eg. If he had previously owned the bus and his creditors were threatening to foreclose on his assets, it would be correct to say "in the event of a foreclosure, he loses the bus.. and after the foreclosure you would say " "he lost the bus" (:-))
It sounds "weird" because it is unusual, especially in comparison with the past tense. I.e., there is only a brief moment when one is actively missing the bus: the moment it has arrived and is pulling away. Before that, he will miss the bus. After that (and forever more) he missed the bus. But at the moment, while he is immersed in his smartphone, watching a video of dancing cats, and the bus' doors are closing while he is oblivious, I mention to my wife, "Hmph! Sieh dir das an. Er verpasst den Bus"
No, because "missed" is past tense. The word verpasst is present (perfect or progressive tense isn't indicated in German). "He missed the bus" indicates that it happened in the past. "Er verpasst den Bus" means it's happening at this moment.
It's not really something we say in English unless we're watching it happen, which isn't often. :)
You didn't understand me, let me tell it like this, the verb "to miss" is a logically speaking terminated verb and although it happens in the present, the action refers to the past. If I say "I am missing the bus", it means that I missed the bus today ,and the day before and every day before that. But if you use "I am missing something" you are imply that the verb is not terminated, so it's more natural to translate it as "I am missing for that, like emotionally, I didn't see it for a while" because in that case "to miss" is not terminated verb. Btw in German by using present tense you can talk about present but also the past and futur (I have B2 level of German,here only to keep my vocabulary on some good level)
You can use present tense in German to refer to future or past, but only with context. "Ich gehe morgen im Park" is "I am/will go to the park tomorrow." But it's unlikely that the Duolingo exercises are trying to teach that. Simplest principles.
If I pick up my jacket to go outside and I get a phone call (let's pretend house phones exist) and someone wants to talk, you can say, "I have to go, I'm missing the bus." And that's where this sentence makes sense.
It's not a great practice sentence, although it's useful in that verpasst really, really sounds like past tense to an English speaker, but it isn't. I'm not sure it's really useful as a way to say that someone is currently missing the bus.
There's an old joke that wouldn't work auf Deutsch:
Teacher: Henry, did you miss school yesterday?
Henry: Not at all, ma'am.
Nein. "Verpassen" is to fail to hit (or catch). "Vermissen" concerns longing for something that is now absent, like your mother, your childhood dog, or rational public debate sans name-calling and demonization of anyone who disagrees with you in the slightest.
This challenge is simply about someone not getting to the Bushaltestelle in time to catch the Bus.
Instead of saying, "no one would every say that in English", it would be more accurate to say, "I can't think of a reason to say that." But often, other people can:
Harry: "Dexter is such a pitiful case: he has no luck at all. I usually look out my window and watch him try to get to work in the morning. Everyday he has a some problem. Last week he tore his pants on that rose bush. Yesterday a car splashed a mud puddle on him. And today, look at him."
Gary: "What's he doing today?"
Harry: "He's missing the bus."
This whole section with "missing" is kind of whack. If I'm missing the bus, present tense, it can mean I miss the bus - it's no longer here, and i long for it. Or in the past or future can mean I didn't catch the bus, or won't catch or get on the bus, but we never say that in the present.
He has missed the bus is in the past tense, "er verpasst" is present tense. "He is missing the bus" is clunky English, but you could say "He misses the bus" which is perfectly fine. Examples: "He misses the bus on a regular basis" or "On Tuesdays, he misses the bus because he has a music lesson after school."