# Verb prefixes



## Linguistix

How does one know what prefix to apply to a word. Such as what I saw in the Topic here on this site about climbing. How would one know when to use say be-, hin0 auf- etc. I can't name all the prefixes off the top of my head. Thanks


----------



## Jana337

Linguistix said:
			
		

> How does one know what prefix to apply to a word. Such as what I saw in the Topic here on this site about climbing. How would one know when to use say be-, hin0 auf- etc. I can't name all the prefixes off the top of my head. Thanks


Bad news: One doesn't know, one has to learn it.  In a similar vein, one does not know whether to use up, on, about etc. in English phrasal verbs. Some prefixes are logical, though.

Jana


----------



## Linguistix

Doesn't it have to do with the context of how one uses the verb? Also, what about the prefiz ver-


----------



## Jana337

Context in which sense? It is not like you choose a prefix depending on the situation. Verbs have their fixed meanings. 

Ver-? One pattern I can think of is the following:
to strengthen - verstärken
to lessen - verringern
to increase/heighten - vergrößern
to lengthen - verlängern

There might be more. MrMagoo will inform you.  But I can assure you that you will have to learn most prefixed verbs the hard way. 

Jana


----------



## Linguistix

I was mainly talking about context as in like, "We must go up on the mesa." would one say "Wir müssen auf den Tafelland aufsteigen."   --or--  "Wir müssen auf den Tisch steigen." That type of thing.


----------



## drei_lengua

Hello,

The prefix be- makes the verb transitive which means that the verb takes a direct object.  For example,

Ich habe geantwortet.  no direct object
Ich habe die Frage beantwortet.  "die Frage" is the direct object

ent- indicates separation or the meaning of away from.  For example, entführen (to kidnap); ent + führen where führen is to lead.  So entführen really means to lead away.

er- can imply a sense of accomplishment like erarbeiten

ver- can indicate that something is wrong like versprechen which is to misspeak.  It is also to promise but that does not really come into play in this discussion

zer- indicates total destruction.  A good example is zerstören (to destroy) which is zer + stören (disturb).  So in other words, to completely disturb something is to destroy it if you will.

Ich hoffe, dass Sie irgendetwas gut von dieser Erklärung gelernt haben.  Gute Nacht.

Brian, Atlanta, Georgia


----------



## elroy

drei_lengua said:
			
		

> ver- can indicate that something is wrong like versprechen which is to misspeak. It is also to promise but that does not really come into play in this discussion


 
I wish to emphasize the importance of this parenthetical insertion.  The fact that "versprechen" means both "to misspeak" and "to promise" shows that, although there are some patterns (as you have described very well), your best bet is to learn verbs individually.


----------



## drei_lengua

elroy said:
			
		

> I wish to emphasize the importance of this parenthetical insertion. The fact that "versprechen" means both "to misspeak" and "to promise" shows that, although there are some patterns (as you have described very well), your best bet is to learn verbs individually.


 
I agree with elroy.  Another thing I would like to add here is that the best advice is to learn the prefixes and their meanings as well as learn the meanings of the verbs themselves independent of the prefixes.  Thus, this combination of knowledge will aid in understanding the German verbs.


----------



## Whodunit

Linguistix said:
			
		

> Also, what about the prefiz ver-


 
Here you go: (Some recent topics)

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=75504&highlight=ver
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=77255&highlight=ver


----------



## drei_lengua

It is by no means easy to generalize in German with respect to verb prefixes.  However, there are a few things interesting with German verbs beginning with ver-:

GROUP 1:  (giver/receiver?) kaufen is to verkaufen as mieten is to vermieten

At first I learned kaufen and verkaufen in German 1 long before we learned about prefixes at the university.  It is interesting to note that a Vermieter (landlord) plays a similar role to a Verkäufer (salesperson).  Conversely, a Mieter (tenant) plays a similar role to a Käufer (buyer).  

One suggestion I have to anyone learning German verbs and especially their prefixes is to learn verbs in groups like the 4 above.  The reason it is good to learn them in groups is because it facilitates learning because as has been shown in the above threads ver- has many meanings.

GROUP 2:  (getting lost)
laufen/sich verlaufen (to get lost while running/walking)
fahren/sich verfahren (to get lost while driving)
fliegen/sich verfliegen - let's hope this never happens 

GROUP 3:  (verbs that change meaning to indicate something bad when used with "sich" in the reflexive)
versprechen - to promise 
sich versprechen - to misspeak

In an effort for all of us to understand German verb prefixes, let's collectively put them in groups.

Lastly, I have never been able to figure out or find out what the difference is between heiraten and verheiraten.  My intuition is to put it in group 1 above.  Let me know your opinion.


----------



## Jana337

> Lastly, I have never been able to figure out or find out what the difference is between heiraten and verheiraten. My intuition is to put it in group 1 above. Let me know your opinion.


 Verheiraten has a not very common meaning, too: Er will seine Tochter an einen reichen Mann verheiraten, den sie nicht liebt.
Looks like group 1, right? 

Jana

P.S. I moved your post here because this thread is more general than senden/versenden.


----------



## gaer

Jana337 said:
			
		

> Verheiraten has a not very common meaning, too: Er will seine Tochter an einen reichen Mann verheiraten, den sie nicht liebt.
> Looks like group 1, right?
> 
> Jana
> 
> P.S. I moved your post here because this thread is more general than senden/versenden.


I agree with your moving of the post, but I hope the person who wrote the message can find it!

Gaer


----------



## gaer

drei_lengua said:
			
		

> Lastly, I have never been able to figure out or find out what the difference is between heiraten and verheiraten. My intuition is to put it in group 1 above. Let me know your opinion.


I agree with your grouping!

We have a slang term in English: "marry off". She got "married off" to a rich man. That is a bit like "verheiraten", but it gets complicated with "sich verheiraten", doesn't it? 

Gaer


----------



## Toma

I have the feeling that simply trying to group verbs in accordance with the meaning that different prefixes give them is a good approach for the meantime, but a wrong and simplistic one too. Prefixes not only change the semantic of the verbs, but they also change the Aktions u. Ferhaltensarten of the verb, thus turning it into transitive, intransitive, perfective and many other. I cannot think of any study eqaully good and approacabel enough, but a comparisson with tbe Slavic languages, where prefixes are abundantly employed, Hindi and Japanese, where you have auxialary verbs serving the same function, Latin, Greek, Sanskrit, etc. may help.


----------



## angeluomo

Has anyone ever considered the word "verlieben"?

To make a mistake while calculating is: "verrechnen".
To make a mistake while speaking is: "versprechen".
To make a mistake in general is: "vertun".
To make a mistake in planning is: "verplanen".  etc., etc.

Also, was heisst das, wenn man sich "verliebt"? A mistake of the emotions?


----------



## gaer

angeluomo said:
			
		

> Has anyone ever considered the word "verlieben"?
> 
> To make a mistake while calculating is: "verrechnen".
> To make a mistake while speaking is: "versprechen".
> To make a mistake in general is: "vertun".
> To make a mistake in planning is: "verplanen". etc., etc.
> 
> Also, was heisst das, wenn man sich "verliebt"? A mistake of the emotions?


That's funny. "Falling in love" is not necessary a bad thing, but it certainly can be a big mistake if you fall in love with the wrong person.  

Gaer


----------



## gaer

Toma said:
			
		

> I have the feeling that simply trying to group verbs in accordance with the meaning that different prefixes give them is a good approach for the meantime, but a wrong and simplistic one too.


I don't think it is "wrong" if it is an aid, but grouping is something you have to be careful about. Quite obviously it is not going to solve all problems.

As for it being simplistic, I think many "simplistic" things are perfect for a particular level or stage, but later we have to outgrow them. Such things are crutches, and we all know what happens when we hold onto crutches too long.


----------



## Toma

I am really sorry. I did not mean to offend anyone. I simply meant to say and probably forgot to mention, that the praefix ver- is said to have some fifteen meanings to it, and that trying to group verbs is a perfect mnemonic device for building up one's Sprachgefuehl. Nothing but a useful crutch, as you said.
I owuld like to offer a more general meaning of that prefix, i.e. the expression of soemthign done completely, to the last, to fulfilment, from where depending on the meaning of the verb it is attached to, it can develop into a negative or positive sense. Cf. verwenden and verwickeln.

I still cannot find the etymology of the prefix. Does anyone have Kluge's etymological dictionary of German?


----------



## gaer

Toma said:
			
		

> I am really sorry. I did not mean to offend anyone.


I don't think anyone was offended. I certainly was not. 


> I simply meant to say and probably forgot to mention, that the praefix ver- is said to have some fifteen meanings to it, and that trying to group verbs is a perfect mnemonic device for building up one's Sprachgefuehl. Nothing but a useful crutch, as you said.


Of course. That's all I meant. Using "rules" helps us "beat the odds" as we are learning. Those same rules often or perhaps usually become crippling later on. As I have repeated mentioned, I don't write German. I have my reasons, but the moment I begin writing in German, I have to fall back on silly rules because I have developed no feel. Everything is mechanical, slow, halting. When I speak, I stammer, stutter or just stand mute, trying to think of words.

On the other hand, when I read German, it just happens. I often get terribly mixed up if I think about it at all, very much like English.


> I owuld like to offer a more general meaning of that prefix, i.e. the expression of soemthign done completely, to the last, to fulfilment, from where depending on the meaning of the verb it is attached to, it can develop into a negative or positive sense. Cf. verwenden and verwickeln.
> 
> I still cannot find the etymology of the prefix. Does anyone have Kluge's etymological dictionary of German?


I thought Mr Magoo covered that pretty well, although I may have misunderstood. I'm not sure of the relationship between wenden and verwenden, using your logic. Would something that is turned or rotated, over and over again be "used" or "utilized"? And does something that winds (wickeln) complicate things when it "winds" continuously, perhaps in many different directions?

I was interested here because I had never thought about these relationships. They are just words I know and have no trouble reading. The mind is a strange. thing. 

Gaer


----------



## drei_lengua

Toma said:
			
		

> I have the feeling that simply trying to group verbs in accordance with the meaning that different prefixes give them is a good approach for the meantime, but a wrong and simplistic one too. Prefixes not only change the semantic of the verbs, but they also change the Aktions u. Ferhaltensarten of the verb, thus turning it into transitive, intransitive, perfective and many other. I cannot think of any study eqaully good and approacabel enough, but a comparisson with tbe Slavic languages, where prefixes are abundantly employed, Hindi and Japanese, where you have auxialary verbs serving the same function, Latin, Greek, Sanskrit, etc. may help.


 
Hast du "Verhaltensarten" gemeint? Du hast dieses Wort geschrieben wie man es ausspricht.

Be careful not to use the word "wrong" when analyzing someone's approach.  That comes across harsh.  Danke im voraus.


----------



## Toma

The way I see it, if wenden would have meant originally soemthing like 'turn, wind' then by using a prefix expressing finality of the act, it would come to mean sth. like to turn, put in place, from where one may get to put to ends, hence utilize. In a similar fashion somehtng when somehting is wound to the extreme, it becomes entangled and hard to undo.
Even if you do not agree with my taxonomy, it gives a good expalanation for verbs like verstehen (under-stand, intelligence<inter-lego), verkehren, verteidigen and probably many others.
Either way I think it is better to have one source from which different meanings, based on the semantics of the verb itself, may have evolved, rather than trying to pose different groupings for one and the same prefix.

As for the critic about not mentionign a name or an author, I just run through the few book I have read on aspect and can say that things are far from being setteld. If intereseted check Comry's Aspect, Cambridge Univ. Press or Anatomy of the Verb, the gothic verb...Albert Lloyd. What I would really like to recommend is Zeno Vendler's paper Verbs and Times, Philos. Reviw, 1957, which at least for me, was a true eye-opener.

Good night


----------



## gangsta

Hi guys!

There's something that really confuses me in German, and no one in Austria seemed to explain the differences between what I'm about to say.

Some verbs have like the same exact meaning, but a slightly different form. Example:

Die Temperatur hat sich VERAENDERT. 
and
Die Temperatur hat sich GEAENDERT.

I never really know when to use which, especially because (as far as I know), they mean the exact same thing. 

Other verbs include those that start with a be- prefix, among other examples (sorry, can't really think of anything at the moment!)

Thanks a lot guys!


----------



## Toadie

All I can answer (and it may not be right), is that be- makes an object accusative.

Ich besteige den Berg.
Ich steige den Berg auf.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, other than that I have very similar questions.

Apparently zer- makes a verb more aggressive.  Stören=to disturb, zerstören=to destroy.


----------



## Jana337

We've had a very good thread specifically for ändern/verändern.


----------



## guyper

Do all of them have their meaning by itself or some of them don't at all? Such as ge- and ent-

Thank you


----------



## gaer

guyper said:


> Do all of them have their meaning by itself or some of them don't at all? Such as ge- and ent-
> 
> Thank you


Normally "ge" only signals a verb form: lernen, gelernt.

Verbs such as brauchen, gebrauchen, are exceptions (need/use), and I can't think of any rule that explains this.

Most verb prefixes at least make subtle changes in the meanings of verbs, and some change the meaning greatly.

Gaer


----------

