1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Die Tür wird geschlossen sei…

"Die Tür wird geschlossen sein."

Translation:The door will be closed.

July 30, 2013



How do i say "The door will have been closed."?


Die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein.


Just a little clarification. The sentence given by sakasiru is an excellent example of "Futur II, das Vorgangspassiv", but the sentence from the exercise is not in Futur II tense! This seems to be "Futur I, das Zustandspassiv"!

Here's an excellent article on that topic, I've just found: http://www.germanveryeasy.com/passive


  • "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein." - The door will be closed. (Futur I, Zustandspassiv)

  • "Die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein." - The door will have been closed. (Futur II, Vorgangspassiv)

  • "Das Kind wird die Tür geschlossen haben." - The kid will have closed the door. (Futur II, Aktiv)

I believe this sentence shouldn't be in the Futur II section.


völlig richtig! Futur II wäre tatsächlich "die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein". Der Satz "die Tür wird geschlossen sein" ist Zustandspassiv im Futur I.


Why in Futur I Zustandpassiv there is three verbs but in Vorgangpasiv there are four, while in Präsens both have two (ist/wird geschlossen)?


Thst's not the case:
Futur I Vorgangspassiv: "wird geschlossen werden" (three words)
Futur I Zustandspassiv: "wird geschlossen sein" (also three words).

Are you talking about "wird geschlossen worden sein"? That's Futur II Vorgangspassiv (Zustandspassiv: "wird geschlossen gewesen sein").


Oh, yeah, I didn't see one of the "I" in your exemples, sorry


Isn't it supposed to be "Die Tür wird geschlossen geworden sein."


no, if there is another participle (geschlossen), the second one loses its "ge-".


And what's the story with this:

Ich werde geimpft gewesen sein

We have a Partizip Perfekt: geimpft, and another one with ge-, the Partizip Perfekt of sein: gewesen.

I believe the explanation for sexual.chocolate's question is that the Futur II Vorgangspassiv is constructed as werden/worden conjugated + Partizip Perfekt.

Correct me if I'm wrong.


I do not find the word "worden"


What do you mean, in the dictionary or in the sentence?


Funny, I just posted this recently: "Also, please note that the German passive voice might look like the future tense, but be aware of their difference. This seems to be a common mistake. For instance, "Die Kinder werden größer." = The children get bigger. versus "Die Kinder werden größer werden." = The children will get bigger". For the full post here: http://www.duolingo.com/comment/84359


Hi Julika. I have a question about this exercise.

This page goes through different tenses of the passive voice : http://german.about.com/library/weekly/aa012901b.htm Here is the tense corresponding to this exercise (will be + pp):

The letter will be written = "Der Brief wird geschrieben werden."

Is this translation correct? if so, then how come in this exercise "The door will be closed." is translated as "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein."? It would seem that, in keeping with that example, it should be "Die Tür wird geschlossen werden." Either way, what is the difference between the two?

The passive voice and the perfect tense can get quite complex, especially when they are mixed in one sentence. I wish we had more exercises on them. In fact, it would be awesome if, in the passive voice section, we had multiple comprehensive examples going over every single tense of the passive voice, similar to the page linked above.

Edit: after going through the lesson again, and doing some reading, I think I have figured out the answer to my question. I think both "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein" and "Die Tür wird geschlossen werden" translate to the same sentence in English; but they are a bit different in German. In the first sentence, the main verb is "sein"; and "geschlossen" is used as an adjective only. In the second sentence, the main verb is "geschlossen", used as the past participle of schließen; and "werden" is the auxilliary to create passive voice. If my guess is correct, the first one would be simple future tense; and the second one will be passive future. Neither would be future perfect; which begs the question why we have this exercise in the section on future perfect. So maybe I'm wrong then. I would really appreciate your feedback on this!


Future perfect would be "die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein" - "the door will have been closed" right?


Right, that is passive future perfect. Active future perfect would be "Die Tür wird geschlossen haben" if I'm not mistaken. ("The door will have closed") A less awkward corresponding sentence in active future perfect would be "Ich werde die Tür geschlossen haben" or "I will have closed the door."


The letter will be written = "Der Brief wird geschrieben werden." = Yes, correct.

Both "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein" and "Die Tür wird geschlossen werden" translate to the same sentence in English = Yes, indeed.

And let me look into the sentences in "Verbs: Futur 2" and "Passive Voice" ... thanks for pointing this out.


Thanks a lot for the clarification! And please also look into "Future Perfect" as well. I came across this sentence in that section, after all! IIRC, some other sentences in the section also look like they don't belong there...


Thank you for this detailed discussion. My first instinct was to translate the sentence in question as 'the door is closed', on the grounds that 'geschlossen' is one of the many perfect participles that have, so to speak, broken away from their roots as verbs and started an independent life as adjectives; but then I considered that this exercise was supposed to be on the future-perfect tense and that therefore I was bound to assume that all the examples involved that tense! I can see now that I should have considered that 'schliessen' is not a 'sein' verb and that consequently 'geschlossen' could not be interpreted here as a participle - in other words, that my first idea was correct without my fully knowing why. I wonder how many people would have spotted this at the first attempt without prior warning?


nevertheless, even in this construction, "geschlossen" is of course still a past participle.


What about "The door will have closed." (by the time I get there)? I didn't think this should be required to be in the passive tense.


See sakasiru's response below to zh.clz.

  • 234

Well it's strange to put in passive after spending most of the lesson on future perfect. Strange teaching that is.


What's wrong with "the door will have closed"?


That suggests the door closed itself actively, and would translate it "die Tür wird sich geschlossen haben."


I don't quite get how that suggests that the door closed itself. Do you mean it suggests that in English? I agree that the sentence doesn't specify any particular actor to do the closing, but I would still use that sentence if there are a bunch of possible people who could be responsible. E.g. I tell you when you check into my hotel that you should bring your key if you're staying out late, because after 11 pm the door will have closed. You don't know or care whether it's the security guard or the concierge or someone else who will actually close the door. Or what if we're talking about a metaphoric/figurative door, such as "After April 1, the door will have closed to register for classes"?


In those cases you'd be better served saying "...will be closed". In that case you would say ...wird geschlossen sein.

"...will be closed" = you only care about the state it will be in: closed
"...will have been closed" = you emphasise that someone will make the action of closing it
"...will have closed" = you are still referring to the action of closing, but without any actor


The English sentence "the door will have closed" suggests the door will have closed itself because "the door" is the subject and the sentence is active voice. You are assuming another agent doing the closing but that is not what the sentence says. Your example about the door being closed after 11pm would normally be phrased "the door will BE closed". If you were to say "the door will HAVE closed" that says it will have closed itself. I agree some people might say this but it is not correct English.


It might suggest that in German, but it does not in English.

Fot all intends and purposes, "The door will be closed" and "The door will have closed" are same here.


I disagree with your blanket statement about the equivalence of the two statements in English. "will be closed" denotes simply a state in the future, whereas "will have closed" denotes an action (closing) and suggests that the door was open before closing.

If you say "the door will be closed" you are not conveying any information about the state of the door before the point in time your are referencing: it might have been open and then closed, or it might have been closed the whole time. But if you say "the door will have closed" you are saying that the door was open at some point before closing.


but this section is 'future perfect: actions that will have been completed IN THE FUTURE', which suggests to me that the door may well have been open prior to it's closing. So 'it will be closed' and 'it will have closed' are then the same. And the door didn't have to close itself, the wind could've done it... Also, following this exercise is the sentence 'Das Restaurent wird geschlossen sein' for which I wrote 'the restaurant WILL HAVE closed' and it was marked as correct. So, 'the door will have closed' should also be correct.


The section may be about future perfect, but the given sentence is not future perfect, but simple future passive voice (state passive). Future perfect is "Die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein" (in English: "the door will have been closed").


Or die Tür wird zugegangen sein


will be = wird sein
It's the same construction as in English.


"Will be" in English isn't future perfect tense. So why is it in this section then?


maybe just to show the difference and the pitfalls?


Does "will have" also equals to "wird sein" when verbs of motion are used?


Yes, but not for all verbs and that is why "The door will have closed." should not be accepted as correct. I admit that in English we would often prefer to say "The door will be closed." in many situations where "The door will have closed." could be used. It is still correct but it would be "Die Tür wird geschlossen haben." and can be used when you want to specify that it was open but will have closed by the time that you are talking about. I tried to report it, thinking like many here that since we were in the perfect lesson it must be a verb that takes "sein" for the future perfect, but I was wrong. Scroll all the way down for the perfect conjugations here: http://conjugator.reverso.net/conjugation-german-verb-geschlossen.html

[deactivated user]

    why is everything else in this lesson "the x will have y" except for this one?


    Her "wird" sounds like "willt" or something


    Agreed. Not sure if it's as intended or not.


    Absolutely agree. Sometimes her 'wird is pronounced 'willt'. I have been marked wrong so many times because of it. It's been reported already but perhaps other users should report it again.


    Yeah, it took me a while to catch on to her accent. She always makes "wird" sound like "willt" She also makes "Tee" sound like "tee" instead of the correct "tay". And her pronunciation of borrowed words is something else again.


    sometimes this woman's voice is indecipherable


    Male voice is also missing some phonemes to my ear, at least on fast speed


    I have listened to the Frau's enunciation again and again and I swear she says "willt" not "wird".


    Why is it geschlossen and not schließt or schließen in this example? How am I to know it would have been past tense? I got "the door will___ to be" so naturally I went for Schließen, as in an action of closing, "to the door will be closed"


    In English it is also not "the door will be closing", but "the door will be closed" with the past participle.

    The passive is formed with the past participle in both languages.


    Question: Is there a significance to using sein vs haben with geschlossen in this sentence? Duo seems to use both, but I thought that you used one or the other with specific past participles (haben with everything but verbs of motion & a few irregularities such as sein/passieren/etc.).

    • Die Tür wird geschlossen sein. = The door will be closed. (Future of "to be" + adjective geschlossen)
    • Ich werde die Tür geschlossen haben. = I will have closed the door. (Future perfect of "to close")

    Similar to English in this respect.

    Die Tür wird geschlossen haben is not possible.

    Die Bank wird geschlossen haben could work, though: The bank will be closed -- geschlossen haben is a fixed idiom, I suppose, for places such as shops.


    Ahh, OK. Thank you very much. It is a sentence from the "Future Perfect" lesson so I assumed it was in that tense, but if I am understanding you right then it is just Simple Future with an adjective?


    Yes, that's what I'd say.


    Yes, it is simple future with the so called "Zustandspassiv" (state passive), which in German exists in addition to the ordinary "Vorgangspassiv" (action passive). Since there is no such distrinction in English, the English sentence "the door will be closed" can be translated as "die Tür wird geschlossen werden" (Vorgangspassiv, denoting that something is done to the door) or "die Tür wird geschlossen sein" (stressing the result that it is closed afterwards). For the latter you always use "sein" (to be), independent of the choice between "haben" and "sein" in other regions of grammar, for the former "werden".


    I have no idea what this new, mind-blowing information means or how it could possibly be integrated into my thoroughly mangled understanding of the German language at this point.

    Now i must look for a category of words known as "action passive", distinguish them from any other types of passive words, treat them with an exception that disregards all other grammatical requirements of the sentence... ugh!

    Composing my thoughts in German will now take at least twice as long because of the need to second guess for this elusive concept!

    Is it too much to ask that we be given more examples of this (if not a full unit) in order to help ease us into clearer comprehension?


    no, this is compounding my confusion & actually making me reconsider my resolve to learn the language


    Well, it's not that complicated. I'll give you some examples, this time using present tense, so you can focus on the passive part (the example on this page complicates the matter because the auxiliary "werden" is used for building the (action) passive as well as the future tense, so it shows up in two different roles).

    active voice: "Mike schlägt mich". ("Mike beats me/is beating me").
    ordinary (action) passive: "Ich werde (von Mike) geschlagen" ("I am (being) beaten (by Mike)". This describes that there is an ongoing (or repeated) action of Mike beating me. Rule: use "werden" as the (conjugated) main verb and add the verb from the active voice sentence as a past participle.

    state passive: "Ich bin geschlagen". (In English: "I am beaten" (not "I am being beaten"!). This talks about the result. After Mike has beaten me, I am now (in the state of being) beaten. Rule: use a declined form of "sein" plus the past participle.
    Tip: you don't need to see this as passive voice. You can interpret the past participle as something like an adjective, so "I am beaten" works very much like "I am sad".

    More examples:
    "Der Laden wird gleich geschlossen" ("The shop is about to get closed) vs.
    "Der Laden ist heute geschlossen" ("Today the shop is closed" (at present time it is closed, but it might have been closed years ago already, so the "closing action" need not be present)).

    The last example reminds me of a pair of sentences where you would even have different translations in English, and it demonstrates the "adjective" character of the state passive:
    "Der Laden wird geöffnet" -- "the shop is(/gets) opened".
    "Der Laden ist geöffnet" -- "The shop is open".


    Thank you, I came to find out why it was sein in some sentences and haben with others. I mistakenly thought that it was one or the other.


    geschlossen is an adjective here then?


    In English, we would call it a participle, a verb that is used to modify a noun or verb.


    nah, it would be a participle if the sentence was 'die tür wird geschlossen werden' -- see kasra's excellent comment above


    "Used as an adjective only" but is also a verb = still a participle.


    The pronunciation of Tuer is bad, it sounds like Tuere.


    Again, my hearing must be bad. Is anyone else hearing "wird" pronounced as "willt" on the audio?


    Yes! I find the Frau's diction to be very poor indeed. Or maybe I am very deaf indeed. Presumably there are regional accents in Germany as there are elsewhere. Does anyone know what part of Germany her accent is from? My mother's family were all from NordRhein/Westphalien (sp?) and they sounded quite different, from the little I was ever able to understand.


    Isn't "The door will be closed" translated like "Die Tür wird geschlossen"?


    No, that's "The door gets closed" (present passive).


    Native german speakers-How common is this "proper speaking" in german?


    Perhaps it's overly-specific for everyday conversations, but listen to news reports or engage in any profession where precision is required and you'll encounter it often.

    [deactivated user]

      According to my German teacher, it is not much used.


      I keep mistaking the "wird" sound for "willt". The audio is not very clear.

      [deactivated user]

        That's because the audio almost always says "willt" instead of "wird".


        I also think this sentence should not be in this section


        After reading the notes about the future perfect my first sentence to practice is this one. What's next? Imperativ? Preterite?


        "The door will be closed." But this is a future passive sentence. It doesn't have the same meaning as future perfect. Thoroughly confused now.


        you are right, this is no future perfect. See my comment above on "Zustandspassiv".


        what's wrong with saying, "The door will have closed" for this one?


        That has a different meaning. Your sentence says "in the meantime there will have been a moment when the door was closing" (active action). This is "Die Tür wird sich geschlossen haben" in German.
        The given German sentence, however, concentrates solely on the outcome/result as in "no matter what happened in between, in the end the door will be in a closed state". This is "The door will be closed" in English.


        If i am heading for that door & someone tells me that "the door will be closed", for me there is an implication that the door might be open while we're speaking about it but by the time i get there the action will have occurred which causes that door to be closed. So your explanation is not settling in my mind properly. I was brought up speaking only English, and cannot think of a single circumstance in which it would be necessary to split hairs like this. Still at a loss when it comes to formulating thoughts which are similar to your example and then figuring out how to build them in German...


        What you are saying does not contradict my explanation. When someone tells you "the door will be closed" it makes no assumptions about whether the door is open or closed at the current moment, but emphasizes that you will find it closed in the moment you will be there.


        someone was just explaining transitive verbs & i suspect that the exercise we're discussing here is somehow related to that other explanation...

        This particular exercise has no object, so it has to end in "to be" & the example you gave me to accommodate my desire to include the word "have" means that the sentence MUST contain an object & so you made the subject reflect itself, "Die Tür wird sich..."

        am i on the right track here?


        Well, you are right in noticing that the second use of "schließen" is indeed transitive and therefore needs "sich" as an object.
        But this is not the reason for the fact that we have different tenses in the two cases.


        the door will have closed. Would it be fine?


        No. This is the translation of "Die Tür wird sich geschlossen haben".


        can, wird geschlossen sein mean, will have closed? if yes, when and how? or does it always means, will be closed?

        i am asking because sometimes, wird..sein means, "will be" and at others times, it means, "will have". Correct me if I am wrong, is it because with intransitive verbs, the wird...sein, construct is actually statal passive rather than future perfect and with transitive use of verbs, the wird...sein construction is future perfect (Aktiv)?


        No, "wird geschlossen sein" can never mean "will have closed".

        "wird sein" literally means "will be". So "Wird X sein" means "will be X", if X is an adjective, like in "will be brown" = "wird braun sein".
        But English uses "to be" as well to form passive voice. That's the case in "The door will be closed". German uses "werden". So the Germa equivalent is "Die Tür wird geschlossen werden" (= "The door will be closed (by someone)"). But you can interpret "closed" as an adjective as well, then it is "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein" (= The door will be (in a ) closed (state)").

        You probably confused this with the fact that perfect tenses are built using "to have" in English, whereas German uses "sein" for some verbs and "haben" for others.
        For the translation of the future perfect "The door will have closed" you use "haben" in German. And you should note that in such a context you need the reflexive form "sich schließen", so it is "Die Tür wird sich geschlossen haben" (literally "the door will have closed itself"). A completely different sentence than the given one.


        thanks. You simplified it for me. Are you a native? I guess not. I am asking this because if you aren't , it is very likely that you would have encountered the same hurdles learning German as any beginner would and therefore would better know the problem areas. Just one mistake in your comment, You translated brown as "rot", otherwise it is very comprehensive.


        I am a German native. But I have learned many languages already and thus I'm aware of the potential difficulties and pitfalls one might encounter.

        Just one mistake in your comment, You translated brown as "rot"

        Thanks for notifying me. I edited it. The mistake happened because I had "red/rot" first and later decided to change it to "brown", because I thought that would be more natural for a door.


        Yeah... kind of like passive here. A better sentence might have been something like: Er wird die Tür geschlossen haben. -- He'll have closed the door. -or- Die Tür wird geschlossen worden sein. -- The door will have been closed (by someone or something, but it's not clear).


        In German there are two different kinds of passive voice. So called "Vorgangspassiv" ("passive of action") and "Zustandspassiv ("passive of state").
        The latter describes a state that has been reached. This is what we have here. The door is in a closed state.
        The former describes an action done to the door. There is someone who performs the action. This agent can be added by "by X".
        In English both are "The door will be closed". But in German those are two different sentences. The decisive difference is the auxiliary used ("sein" vs. "werden"):
        "Die Tür wird geschlossen sein" (state).
        "Die Tür wird geschlossen werden" (action).


        That makes sense to me. I guess I think of the Zustandspassiv as a situation where the Partizip (geschlossen) is more like an adjective, and sein is just what it is.


        How is this future perfect?

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