- Forum >
- Topic: German >
- "Wir mussten mit dem Hund spa…
49 Comments
1286
The "u" sound should give it away though: It's mussten, and müssen (ie. there is no "mussen").
I agree, although my foreign ears think it's still pretty tough to differentiate :(
Try thinking of the literal translation: "We had to go for a walk with the dog."
"We had to walk the dog" is the best way to say it in English. That translates to "Wir mussten dem Hund spazieren", am i right?
"Wir mussten mit dem Hund spazieren gehen" is the best way in German to say the English "we had to walk the dog." I gave the literal translation to show dgough how to understand that "spazieren gehen (to go strolling/take a walk)" could be the same word for walking the dog.
I translated this sentence thus: "We had to go with the dog for a walk". Why is it not correct?
Just that it's very German word order - not English! Put "We had to go for a walk with the dog" and you'll be fine! "Spazieren" ="to go for a walk" so anything else goes after the whole phrase, such as "in the park", "in the rain", "with the children". . .
I agree with flis333. The audio is poor. You can hardly make out the 't' sound.
Is it only me, or is not the same meaning. DL states "Wir mussten mit dem Hund spazieren gehen." means "We had to walk the dog". The way I understand the German phrase is:"We had to take a walk and incidentally took the dog with us" and not that "We must take out the dog".... Can a native speaker clarify this for me, please...
Without the dog, "spazieren gehen" und "müssen" would not combine. "Spazieren gehen" usually means you are walking for pleasure, the only good reason that can change this pleasure into an obligation is the dog.
Your version would sound more like: "Wir wollten einen Spaziergang machen, und haben dann auch den Hund gleich mitgenommen."
The opposite: "Wir mussten mit dem Hund raus, und da haben wir gleich einen richtigen Spaziergang gemacht.
Aber: (Mutter hat gesagt) Wir müssen spazieren gehen, obwohl wir nicht wollen/wollten.
I thought spazierengehen was a seperable verb. Shouldn't it be altogether at the end?
That is not how the idiom is done in English. "We go for a walk." or "We walk the dog." The literal "We had to go for a walk with the dog." and "We must go for a walk with the dog." are also accepted, but more commonly we would say "We had to walk the dog."
- 1564
I am German and I have a dog. And I can tell you for sure:
When the dog needs to go outside, I have to use "Ich führe den Hund aus". (or coll. German: "Ich führe den Hund Gassi" - Gassi stands for 'Gasse', small or narrow street)
to walk the dog = den Hund ausführen
When I want to go for a walk and somebody urges me to take his dog along, then I can say Ich musste mit dem Hund spazieren gehen.
Sorry to say, but the DL translation is NOT correct.
That is not correct English. You can either say "must have gone" or "had to go"/"must go".
Some prepositions require dative, including "mit". http://german.about.com/od/grammar/ht/Dative-Prepositions.htm
Some prepositions can use either dative or accusative: http://german.about.com/od/grammar/a/DualPrepositions.htm
There are even verbs that require dative: http://german.about.com/od/onlinecourses/fl/German-Dative-Verbs.htm
http://german.about.com/od/grammar/fl/The-Four-German-Noun-Cases.htm
"We must go on a walk with the dog" - go /for/ a walk is accepted, but go /on/ a walk is not, even though they mean the same thing...
"Had to walk the dog" and " Had to go for a walk with the dog" (both accepted correct) to me have slightly different meanings. The first is an obligation to take the dog out for exercise or allow it to perform its natural functions. The second is being obliged to go for a walk accompanied by the dog, for some reason, not necessarily the first. Very subtle but there. How is that differentiated in German?
I try reading all of these comments; but I can't literally read ALL of them, so I hope this isn't redundant. I assume the "gehen" is essential to the meaning of this sentence but I'm not sure of the reasoning as to why. I thought you could just use the verb spazieren and it alone would mean went for a stroll. In other words, I'm not sure I understand why you couldn't have just said "Wir mussten mit dem Hund spazieren." unless the gehen makes it more of a command? Hoping someone can clear that up for me. Danke in advance.
No, you must use "gehen" it is part of the idiom. "gehen spazieren" is used for "to go for a walk", perhaps as it is different from "spazieren fahren""which is "to go for a drive." "Wir waren spazieren." is "We went for a walk." http://dictionary.reverso.net/german-english/spazieren
"We had to go take a walk with the dog" didn't work. Is that because of the word "take"?
Does it matter if spazieren or gehen is in the last position? Or could the sentence be "Wir mussten mit dem Hund gehen spazieren" ?
"We had to go for a walk with the dog" was marked as wrong. DL showed "We'd to go to ..." On this page it shows more reasonable translation " We had to walk the dog"
- 1564
@Gregory: Wir mussten den Hund zum Walken mitnehmen (denn wir können ihn noch nicht allein lassen, er macht sonst Pipi auf den Teppich)
we had to go for a walk with the dog. Is this acceptable? We had to walk the dog, somehow doesn't seem very English to me, though I am not a native. what is difference between spazierengehen and spazieren gehen?
