Friday, June 6, 2014

Plusquamperfekt, or: Sharon's notes, Verby things, part one.

I am preparing for a German exam.  You have been warned.

So,what's the deal with "plusquamperfekt"?

I'm glad you asked.  The pluperfect tense of a verb is the form we usually use to indicate something that had occurred even earlier in the past than the events currently being recounted.

It's the "had completed" in the sentences:  "I had completed my morning routine when the phone rang" and "When Jason came to see me I had already completed my resignation".  It indicates that something was done, over and finished by the time this part of the story was taking place.

"This dog had bitten postmen previously, so Todd was extremely wary of his 'friendly' greeting."

Notice that, in English, we have two components going into this verb?  There's the auxiliary, which is usually 'had' or 'was' (the simple past tense forms of 'have' and 'be') and the past-participle version of the main verb.

In German, this tense is created by using the Präteritum (simple past tense) of haben or sein as the auxiliary verb and the Partzip II (past participle) form of the main verb... oh, wait.  That's exactly the same thing we do in English.

For the record, the simple past of haben and sein are thus:

ich hatte
du hattest
er/sie/es hatte
wir hatten
ihr hattet
sie/Sie hatten
ich war
du warst
er/sie/es war
wir waren
ihr wart
sie/Sie waren

Which always trips me up a bit, because something in my head thinks 'hat' should be past tense - but it's not (it's third person singular present).  Er hat = he has.  Er hatte = he had.  Remember that, kids.

Now, the Plusquamperfekt is not exactly like English.  Some aspects of this are very German.

For example, the auxiliary and the main verb have to sit in particular parts of the clause.  In a bog-standard German clause, the verb always takes the second position:

"Der Hund biss den Mann"

But if there is an auxiliary verb and a main verb, then the auxiliary verb takes the second position (and cops all the conjugation) and the past participle of the main verb (sans conjugation) scoots to the end of the clause:

"Der Hund hatte den Mann gebissen"

Of course, that moves around a bit for more complicated sentences:

"Wenn der Hund den Mann gebissen hatte, warum klagte er nicht?"

Yeah.  Verbs.  The Germans probably think that sort of thing is reasonable.

Another thing that is quite German about the Plusquamperfekt is the choice of auxiliaries.  In English, we pretty much use "had" for everything.  We really only use "was" in certain dialects, and then really only for "go" and "do" ("I was done").

In German, however, you use "war" (and it's brothers) for any verb where something changes its position in the space-time continuum.  Or any existential continuum.  And it doesn't really have to "change" it's state.  It could be staying still.  Just ask yourself:  "is this verb, in some way, shape or form, about movement?"  If the answer is "yes", then it's highly likely you use "war".

Did you arrive?  Depart?  Stay?  Go?  Become?  Be?

Ich war angekommen.  Sie war abgefahren.  Wir waren geblieben.  Ihr wart dort gegangen.  Es war kalt gewesen.  Sie waren Lehrerin geworden.

This is also the case for verbs like flying, driving, running, walking... but also for verbs like sleeping, happening, growing, being born and dying.

"Wir waren nach Berlin gefahren, bevor es war passiert."

The Plusquamperfekt is actually pretty straightforward.  The hardest part is getting the past participle right.

The Perfekt, now, that's a bit odd.  But, as they say, is another story.

No comments:

Newest post

Permitted and admitted

 With the rise of casual use of Generative AI software over the past year and a bit (has it really only been that long?), we've also see...

Popular posts