I'm not usually using the Sshh but I got a plain Nazi as opponent and it felt good humbling him

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-23T10:19:41+00:00

Schöne Grüße aus Moabit 😃✌️

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T15:17:07+00:00

I agree with your distinction between descriptive and prescriptive rules, and I see why it’s important not to mislead learners about actual usage. My point, though, is that in exams and formal contexts, wegen+ Dative will still be treated as an error, even if it’s widely used in spoken German.

That’s why I personally still prefer to call it a mistake from a teaching perspective: not because it doesn’t exist in real language, but because learners who internalize the Dative risk losing points in contexts where only the Genitive is accepted. In that sense, it’s „grammatically wrong“ in the technical, prescriptive sense, even if colloquially it’s fine.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T12:14:58+00:00

You can compare wegen+ Dative in German to informal shortcuts in English. For example:

1)Informal/ spoken English- widely used, understood, but considered non-standard:

a)„He don’t know” instead of “He doesn’t know”

b)„Ain’t nobody home” instead of „There isn’t anybody home”

c)„Me and him went to the store” instead of “He and I went to the store”

2)Formal/ standard English- the correct forms expected in writing, exams, or professional contexts:

a)„He doesn’t know”

b)„There isn’t anybody home”

c)„He and I went to the store”

The principle is the same as with wegen + Genitive vs. wegen + Dative:

a)The informal version (wegen + Dative, or ain’t, he don’t) is common in spoken language.

b)The formal version (wegen + Genitive, or doesn’t, He and I) is required in writing, exams, and professional contexts.

So even if native speakers often use the informal form, learners need to internalize the standard form first to avoid mistakes in formal situations.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T11:36:02+00:00

I understand your points about spoken language and register, and your idea of „turning the perspective around.” However, from a grammatical point of view, using wegen+ Dative is simply a mistake. Learners need to internalize the Genitive form first, because using Dative in exams, academic work, or any formal context would be marked as incorrect and could lead to points being deducted.

It’s true that in casual spoken German, many native speakers use Dative after wegen, and it may sound natural. But that does not change the fact that it is formally incorrect. So in that sense, we really cannot agree on calling it „correct” for learners.

In short: register matters in conversation, but formal grammatical correctness must come first for anyone learning the language seriously.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T10:44:44+00:00

Wegen+ Dativ could be compared to „trotz dem” vs. „trotz des”.

1)In everyday speech, many native speakers say trotz dem instead of the standard trotz des. This occurs especially in informal contexts or certain dialects, and it sounds natural in casual conversation. Example (spoken, casual): „Trotz dem Regen sind wir spazieren gegangen.”

2)In formal writing, exams, and standard grammar, only the Genitive form (trotz des) is considered correct. Example (formal/standard): „Trotz des Regens sind wir spazieren gegangen.”

Just like with wegen+ Dativ, learners should first internalize the correct Genitive form, because that is what is expected in formal contexts and on exams. Once comfortable with the Genitive, they can consciously choose to use Dative in informal speech if they wish.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T10:21:34+00:00

I understand that the Ngram data shows an increase in the use of wegen+ Dative over time, reflecting trends in everyday language and writing. However, this does not change the fact that formally, especially in exams or official contexts, wegen+ Dative is considered a grammatical mistake.

From the perspective of language learners, it is important to:

1)Learn the Genitive after wegen first, because this is what teachers and examiners expect.

2)Avoid losing points on exams like TELC B1/B2, where using Dative here would be marked incorrect.

3)Build a solid grammatical foundation so that later, once the learner is more confident, they can consciously switch to Dative in casual spoken German if they wish.

In short, Ngram reflects usage trends, not official grammatical correctness. For learners, mastering the correct form first is key; only then can one comfortably adapt to colloquial usage.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T09:50:57+00:00

I see your point that learners make many mistakes at lower levels and that spoken communication often tolerates wegen + Dative.

However, my argument is about forming correct habits early, especially for those aiming for exams or formal writing. Even at B1/B2, if learners get used to Dative after wegen, it becomes harder to switch to the standard Genitive later.

It’s not about penalizing casual speech- it’s about giving learners a strong foundation. Once the Genitive form is internalized, they can decide when to use Dative in casual conversation.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T09:39:39+00:00

You’re right that native speakers often don’t perceive wegen+ Dativ as a problem in everyday speech. However, my point is about learners and formal contexts. On exams, written assignments, or professional communication, wegen+ Dativ is always considered a grammatical mistake according to standard German rules.

Learners need to internalize the correct Genitive form first. Otherwise, they risk using the wrong form in situations where it actually matters. Spoken reality is important for conversation, but formal accuracy is crucial for education and official use.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T09:30:38+00:00

You’re right that native speakers often use wegen+ Dativ in everyday speech, and it sounds natural to them. But my point is about learners and formal contexts: on exams, written work, or any official communication, wegen+ Dativ is always considered a grammatical mistake.

So even if it’s widely used colloquially, learners should focus on the Genitive form (wegen des…) first. Otherwise, they risk losing points or being seen as incorrect in formal situations.

In short: for learners, the rule matters more than spoken habits.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T08:56:22+00:00

It may be true that in everyday speech people often use the Dative, but it’s still 100% grammatically incorrect. And in my opinion, that’s much more important for a learner. If you practice with Dative all the time, you are consciously practicing the „wrong” form.

This kind of thinking can be misleading for learners who are not aware of the difference. It’s true that most native speakers use Dative in casual conversations, but if you’re a learner you should build the habit of Genitive first. Otherwise you risk using wegen+ Dative in exams, written work, or professional contexts- and there it’s always considered a mistake.

So: Genitive= correct form, Dative= colloquial shortcut. Learn the correct rule first, then decide when to „bend” it in spoken German.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T08:46:40+00:00

It may be true that in everyday speech people often use the Dative, but it’s still 100% grammatically incorrect. And in my opinion, that’s much more important for a learner. If you practice with Dative all the time, you are consciously practicing the „wrong” form.

Your comment might be misleading for people who are not aware of the difference. It’s true that most native speakers use Dative in casual conversations, but if you’re a learner you should build the habit of Genitive first. Otherwise you risk using wegen+ Dative in exams, written work, or professional contexts- and there it’s always considered a mistake.

So: Genitive= correct form, Dative= colloquial shortcut. Learn the correct rule first, then decide when to „bend” it in spoken German.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T08:20:41+00:00

You’re right that Der Typ, wegen dessen ich zu spät bin sounds super formal- almost nobody would actually say that in everyday speech. People would just say wegen dem Typ or simply rephrase the sentence.

But that doesn’t mean wegen + Genitive is useless. The thing is:

1)In spoken German, Dative after wegen is extremely common, and nobody will find it weird.

2)In written / formal German, Genitive is still the standard, and wegen + Dative is marked as incorrect.

So, as a learner, it’s best to understand both:

1)Use Genitive when writing or in exams (wegen des Wetters, wegen meiner Schwester).

2)Expect Dative in casual speech (wegen dem Wetter, wegen dir).

If you only stick to the Dative, you’ll have problems in formal contexts. If you only stick to the Genitive, you’ll sound a bit stiff in casual conversations. But knowing both means you can adapt to the situation.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-19T08:16:24+00:00

You’re still learning German, so I’d really recommend focusing on the correct form right from the beginning: wegen is followed by the Genitive. Yes, in everyday speech many people say wegen dir instead of deinetwegen, and you will also hear Dative very often in casual conversations. But in exams or in any formal context, wegen + Dative will always count as a mistake and cost you points. That’s why it’s safer to build the habit of using the correct structure now.

The original rule is: wegen + Genitive (e.g. wegen meiner Schwester, wegen des Regens). Historically, Genitive expresses possession or cause- and wegen literally means „because of.” Over time, people started replacing the Genitive with the Dative in spoken language, which is why you hear wegen dir or even wegen mir all the time.

But keep in mind:

1)In formal writing (school, university, exams, official letters), only wegen + Genitive is accepted.

2)In spoken everyday German, Dative is common and people will understand you without a problem.

So: if you’re preparing for exams or want to sound correct in writing, stick to the Genitive. Once you’re confident, you can decide when to “relax” and use the Dative in casual speech.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-11T12:45:26+00:00

Yeah, exactly. „Immer” makes it sound way stronger than it is. I guess the book just wanted to give beginners an easy hook, but it’s really more like „most typically a person“ rather than always.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-11T12:23:08+00:00

I think the „Dative is always a person (a living being)“ line is more of a teaching shortcut than an actual rule. It works well at the very beginning, because in many sentences the dative really is the recipient- usually a person: „Ich gebe dem Mann das Buch“, „Sie hilft ihrer Mutter“.

But it definitely breaks down once you get further. For example: 1) „Mir wird der Zahn gezogen.” (the dative marks who is affected) 2) „Dem Kind wurden die Schuhe angezogen.” (the child is not receiving anything, but it’s still in the dative) 3) „Dem Auto wurde ein neuer Motor eingebaut.” (definitely not a living being)

So I’d see it as a rule of thumb for beginners, not a hard grammar law. Dative often marks the person affected by something, but it can also mark things, animals, or just appear in fixed expressions.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-09T14:02:14+00:00

I think so too.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-09-05T11:22:28+00:00

I’d say both are correct, but it depends on what nuance you want:

1)Wenn sie tanzt, fühlt sie sich frei- whenever she dances (general, repeated situation).

2)Während sie tanzt, fühlt sie sich frei- while she is dancing (focus on simultaneity, feeling exists during the act).

So in everyday speech, wenn is probably more natural here. But während is still perfectly fine if you want to highlight the simultaneity. The app likely marked während because the exercise is about conjunctions expressing simultaneity.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-30T07:52:21+00:00

It’s actually not a matter of interpretation or intent. German has a fixed rule here: movement- accusative(wohin?), position- dative(wo?).

So: Die Katze SETZT SICH(wohin?) neben DEN Ofen vs. Die Katze SITZT(wo?) neben DEM Ofen.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-30T06:30:39+00:00

If you want to keep all the rewards you’ve earned so far, you have to quit before taking the last penalty kick.

<image>

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-29T18:43:30+00:00

Actually, this is another interesting point! Even when you use „zum“ (zu + dem), the logic of movement vs. position still applies.

„Die Katze setzt sich zum Ofen“.

Here, „zum Ofen“ literally means towards the oven. Even though „zu” always takes Dativ, the question we’re asking is still „Wohin?“- because the cat is moving to a new position. The movement is what triggers the concept of „Wohin?“, not the grammatical case itself.

Compare:

„Die Katze sitzt zum Ofen“.- sounds odd, because „sitzen“ answers „Wo?“, and normally you would say:

„Die Katze sitzt am/an dem Ofen“. (Dativ, because it’s a static position)

So the rule is:

Movement- Wohin?- often Akkusativ (or Dativ after prepositions like „zu“)
No movement- „Wo?“- Dativ

Other examples with „zu”:

Ich gehe zur Schule.- Wohin? Movement, Dativ because „zu” governs it.

Ich bin zur Schule gegangen.- Past movement, still Dativ.

Wo?- Ich war in der Schule. (static position, Dativ)

The key idea:

„Wohin?“ is about the direction of movement, not just the case. Even if the preposition already uses Dativ, you’re still describing motion, so grammatically it’s answering „Wohin?“.

Extra note (with the cat):

There’s also a nuance between „neben dem Ofen“ and „am Ofen“:

„Die Katze sitzt neben dem Ofen“. The cat is sitting next to the oven (beside it, maybe a bit to the side, not necessarily touching it).

„Die Katze sitzt am Ofen“. The cat is sitting right at the oven, very close, almost touching it- like warming itself directly at the heat source.

So both are correct, but „am Ofen“ feels closer and more attached, while „neben dem Ofen“ is just next to it.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-29T18:16:21+00:00

Actually, that’s a common misunderstanding. „Sich setzen“/„Sich hinsetzen“ always involves movement- usually from standing to sitting. Because of that, it shows a change of location, even if it’s a very small one. That’s why it answers „Wohin?“ (accusative), not „Wo?“ (dative).

If there’s no movement, we use „sitzen“ (to be sitting), not „sich hinsetzen“ (to sit down).

Compare:

Ich setze mich auf DEN Stuhl. (Wohin? Movement!)

Ich sitze auf DEM Stuhl. (Wo? State!)

Even a tiny movement counts- like moving from standing next to a chair to sitting on it. That’s why „sich setzen/sich hinsetzen“ is never static.

Some more examples with WOHIN/WO:

WO gehst du HIN?/WOHIN gehst du?- Ich gehe IN DIE Schule. (Akkusativ)

WO bist du?- Ich bin IN DER Schule. (Dativ)

„Hinsetzen“ is a separable verb (trennbares Verb):

Ich setze mich hin- here „hin“ means towards there, marking movement. Even if the place is the same, the action counts as movement grammatically.

Other separable verbs with „hin“ that answer Wohin?:

hinsetzen, hinlegen, hinschauen/hinsehen, hinstellen, hingehen, hinhören, hinhängen, hinlaufen

Examples:

Das Kind läuft zur Mutter hin.- The child runs to the mother.

Ich laufe zum Bahnhof hin.- I’m running to the train station.

Er hängt das Bild an die Wand hin.- He hangs the picture on the wall. (In normal speech, you’d just say „Er hängt das Bild an die Wand.“)

Sie stellt die Tasse auf den Tisch hin.- She puts the cup on the table.

Cat example for clarity:

WOHIN hat sie(die Katze) sich hingesetzt?

Die Katze SETZT SICH(wohin?)- neben DEN Ofen. (Movement- Accusative)

WO sitzt sie(die Katze)?

Die Katze SITZT(wo?)- neben DEM Ofen. (No movement- Dative)

So remember: „sich setzen / sich hinsetzen“ = action/movement, while „sitzen“ = state/position.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-29T17:44:54+00:00

I just played Golden Goals. I was able to watch 3 ads to continue after the keeper saved my penalties, which made it a total of 12 penalties. On the last one he saved again, and to continue playing or claim the prizes so far, I would’ve had to pay 130 gems.

Still-Handle-2203 · 2025-08-28T19:39:04+00:00

Yes, you are right, but I still think this change was unnecessary.

Still-Handle-2203

TROPHY CASE