# können / dürfen



## Magg

Morning all!

I was wondering if they are the same or similar, or they´re not.

Patient to the doctor:
*Darf ich Sport machen?
Kann ich Sport machen?*

Thanks,
Magg


----------



## Whodunit

Magg said:
			
		

> Morning all!
> 
> I was wondering if they are the same or similar, or they´re not.
> 
> Patient to the doctor:
> *Darf ich Sport machen?
> Kann ich Sport machen?*
> 
> Thanks,
> Magg



Well, that's the same like in English:

May I go in for sports?
Can I go in for sports?
(are there any better translations?)

I believe there's once been a thread in the English Only forum, but I can re-interpret it:

The first example is Standard/High German and the second one is colloquial. There's no big difference, and both of them would be understood.


----------



## jorge_val_ribera

¡Hola!

Bueno, yo entendería algo diferente en cada caso. A mí me enseñaron que "dürfen" se utiliza como para pedir permiso y "können" para decir que alguien es capaz de hacer algo. El problema para nosotros, los hispanohablantes, es que en español usamos "poder" para ambos casos. Entonces, un niño le preguntaría a sus padres: "¿Puedo ir a jugar?", pero eso yo lo traduciría como "Darf ich spielen gehen?" y no como "Kann ich spielen gehen?". Pero si alguien dice: "Yo puedo correr rápido", lo traduciría como "Ich kann schnell rennen" y no como "Ich darf schnell rennen". 

En el caso de "Darf/Kann ich Sport machen", yo entendería la oración con "darf" más como "Doctor, sé que estoy débil, pero me siento capaz de hacer deporte...¿me da permiso?" y la segunda como "¿Tengo la fuerza suficiente para hacer deporte o no lo lograría?". Pero, bueno, ése es mi punto de vista, un alemán tal vez lo vea diferente. Pero lo importante es siempre recordar que cuando uno tiene una oración con "poder", no necesariamente se tiene que usar "können" al traducirla (yo antes cometía ese error muy frecuentemente, por eso te lo digo). Bueno, espero haber sido de ayuda. ¡Adiós!


----------



## elroy

jorge_val_ribera said:
			
		

> ¡Hola!
> 
> Bueno, yo entendería algo diferente en cada caso. A mí me enseñaron que "dürfen" se utiliza como para pedir permiso y "können" para decir que alguien es capaz de hacer algo. El problema para nosotros, los hispanohablantes, es que en español usamos "poder" para ambos casos. Entonces, un niño le preguntaría a sus padres: "¿Puedo ir a jugar?", pero eso yo lo traduciría como "Darf ich spielen gehen?" y no como "Kann ich spielen gehen?". Pero si alguien dice: "Yo puedo correr rápido", lo traduciría como "Ich kann schnell rennen" y no como "Ich darf schnell rennen".
> 
> En el caso de "Darf/Kann ich Sport machen", yo entendería la oración con "darf" más como "Doctor, sé que estoy débil, pero me siento capaz de hacer deporte...¿me da permiso?" y la segunda como "¿Tengo la fuerza suficiente para hacer deporte o no lo lograría?". Pero, bueno, ése es mi punto de vista, un alemán tal vez lo vea diferente. Pero lo importante es siempre recordar que cuando uno tiene una oración con "poder", no necesariamente se tiene que usar "können" al traducirla (yo antes cometía ese error muy frecuentemente, por eso te lo digo). Bueno, espero haber sido de ayuda. ¡Adiós!



Eso es técnicamente el caso, pero lo que pasa es que tanto en alemán como en inglés, se usa "can/können" en vez de "may/dürfen" en el lenguaje hablado.  Por lo tanto, "can" y "können" *pueden * significar ambas cosas (permiso y capacidad), y la única manera para decidir sería el contexto.  Me parece que la pregunta aquí se trataba del empleo de "können" en vez de "dürfen," y si había una diferencia entre los dos.  Cuando se trata de pedir permiso, la única diferencia es el nivel de formalidad.  Si no "können" se referiría a la capacidad.

Espero haber ayudado y no confundido!


----------



## elroy

> May I go in for sports?
> Can I go in for sports?
> (are there any better translations?)



I would say

Can/May I *do sports*?


----------



## jorge_val_ribera

Hm, sí, entiendo lo que dices, Elroy... Eso es siempre algo interesante en un idioma que se aprende...uno aprende una cosa y luego cuando se pone a hablar con un nativo, se da cuenta de que no sigue muchas de las reglas que uno sabe. Eso me pasó en el tiempo que estuve en Alemania y me esforzaba por hacer oraciones bonitas como: "Er hat gesagt, er werde in einer Stunde kommen", a lo que me respondían simplemente: "Das sagt kein Mensch!".

Y, bueno, yo también viví eso del usar "können" con el significado de "dürfen", pero si hablamos de un correcto Hochdeutsch, creo que hay que llamar a las cosas por su nombre jeje. Bueno, ¡saludos!


----------



## gaer

Magg said:
			
		

> Morning all!
> 
> I was wondering if they are the same or similar, or they´re not.
> 
> Patient to the doctor:
> *Darf ich Sport machen?*
> *Kann ich Sport machen?*
> 
> Thanks,
> Magg


Magg,

I think you know that "can I" and "may I" are used interchangeably in English when asking permission. I think you also know that only "may" is safe in formal usage.

However, I have a question about the German sentence itself, which I'll ask in a separate post.

Gaer


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> I would say
> 
> Can/May I *do sports*?


 
I agree. But *Darf ich Sport machen? *seems strange to me without context.

When would we ask such a question? It almost sounds like a question you would ask a doctor:

Can (may) I do/play sports NOW?

Do you see my point? It looks as though you are asking if you allowed to play sports because of a medical or some other problem that you hope is over.

Or am I missing something here?

Gaer


----------



## jorge_val_ribera

Look at the very first post. There is the answer: "Patient to the doctor (...)"


----------



## gaer

jorge_val_ribera said:
			
		

> Look at the very first post. There is the answer: "Patient to the doctor (...)"


Oh NO!!!

Okay, I totally overlooked that sentence, seeing only the sentences in bold. How STUPID could I be?

NOW it makes sense. Duh!

Gaer


----------



## Magg

Thanks all.

I see they both are interchangable in most cases but "dürfen" is fomally used to express permission.

Magg


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> I would say
> 
> Can/May I *do sports*?



Thanks. I would have guessed this version, but after searching for it on LEO (no results) and on Google (only "Do sports ...?"), I decided in favor of the above.


----------



## elroy

jorge_val_ribera said:
			
		

> Hm, sí, entiendo lo que dices, Elroy... Eso es siempre algo interesante en un idioma que se aprende...uno aprende una cosa y luego cuando se pone a hablar con un nativo, se da cuenta de que no sigue muchas de las reglas que uno sabe. Eso me pasó en el tiempo que estuve en Alemania y me esforzaba por hacer oraciones bonitas como: "Er hat gesagt, er werde in einer Stunde kommen", a lo que me respondían simplemente: "Das sagt kein Mensch!".
> 
> Y, bueno, yo también viví eso del usar "können" con el significado de "dürfen", pero si hablamos de un correcto Hochdeutsch, creo que hay que llamar a las cosas por su nombre jeje. Bueno, ¡saludos!



Claro, estoy completamente de acuerdo.  Sin embargo, es también útil entender las cosas como se hacen en el lenguaje cotidiano, para que se te diga cada vez menos "das sagt keiner!"     Tu aportación fue válida y correcta, lo único que quise hacer yo es aclarar el uso informal del verbo.

Yo tampoco, aún no siendo alemán, te aconsejería de usar el "Konjunktiv I" al hablar!


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> I agree. But *Darf ich Sport machen? *seems strange to me without context.
> 
> When would we ask such a question? It almost sounds like a question you would ask a doctor:
> 
> Can (may) I do/play sports NOW?
> 
> Do you see my point? It looks as though you are asking if you allowed to play sports because of a medical or some other problem that you hope is over.
> 
> Or am I missing something here?
> 
> Gaer



Yes, I think you're right.

I would probably say "Would it be safe for me to participate in sports?" or "Would it be safe for me to do sports/start doing sports again?"

That way there's no ambiguity...


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Oh NO!!!
> 
> Okay, I totally overlooked that sentence, seeing only the sentences in bold. How STUPID could I be?
> 
> NOW it makes sense. Duh!
> 
> Gaer



Haha, Gaer, I didn't realize you hadn't read that part.  I must say, your deduction was very accurate considering you had no idea!


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Thanks. I would have guessed this version, but after searching for it on LEO (no results) and on Google (only "Do sports ...?"), I decided in favor of the above.



Where did you find "go in for sports"?  That seems like a very specific expression, which without context I would have to interpret as meaning "go into a building for the purpose of doing sports."


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Haha, Gaer, I didn't realize you hadn't read that part. I must say, your deduction was very accurate considering you had no idea!


Too many posts to read these days!  

Gaer


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Yes, I think you're right.
> 
> I would probably say "Would it be safe for me to participate in sports?" or "Would it be safe for me to do sports/start doing sports again?"
> 
> That way there's no ambiguity...


Now that we know it's a question to a doctor, then this would be no problem:

"Can (may) I play sports [now]?"

And I think the concept of "now" needs to be there in German too.

I can't think of anyone in the US who is concerned about being allowed to play sports AGAIN (after an injury or some other problem) using "may".  

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Now that we know it's a question to a doctor, then this would be no problem:
> 
> "Can (may) I play sports [now]?"
> 
> And I think the concept of "now" needs to be there in German too.
> 
> I can't think of anyone in the US who is concerned about being allowed to play sports AGAIN (after an injury or some other problem) using "may".
> 
> Gaer



Yeah, you're right.  I think I'd say "can" in either case because even in the context of asking permission what you're really asking is whether you're now able to play sports again.  (Why would a doctor not allow you to play sports if your condition permits it?!   )  Hardly anyone uses "may," anyway, even when it does refer to permission.

Sometimes when someone asks me "Can I have a drink?" or something similar, I'll say "You may," just because that's more natural to me than "You can," but then I worry the person might think I'm being condescending (you know, like when teachers go, "You _may_," emphasizing the correct usage of the term - or even worse, "I don't know, can you?"), but so far I haven't had any major issues.

I think a possible compromise is "could."  

"Could I have a drink?"

Grammar rules aside, it's clear here that you're asking for permission, yet it doesn't sound as forced as "may."  By the way, this wouldn't really work for the sports question.  Oh, English!


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> Where did you find "go in for sports"?  That seems like a very specific expression, which without context I would have to interpret as meaning "go into a building for the purpose of doing sports."



 HERE!


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> HERE!



Hm...well, like I said, "to go in for sports" means "to go into a building for the purpose of doing sports."

Examples:

-Why are you going to the gym today?
-Oh, I'm going in for sports. 

(This sounds slightly awkward but acceptable.)

You could also say "coming in."

-I came in for sports today.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> Hm...well, like I said, "to go in for sports" means "to go into a building for the purpose of doing sports."
> 
> Examples:
> 
> -Why are you going to the gym today?
> -Oh, I'm going in for sports.
> 
> (This sounds slightly awkward but acceptable.)
> 
> You could also say "coming in."
> 
> -I came in for sports today.



But "Sport treiben" doesn't indicate to a specific place!

Was machst du heute Nachmittag?
Ich treibe Sport.

"Sport treiben" sounds awkward, too, but I know what it means.

Warum gehst du heute in die Sporthalle?
Na, weil ich _da_ Sport treiben will.


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> But "Sport treiben" doesn't indicate to a specific place!
> 
> Was machst du heute Nachmittag?
> Ich treibe Sport.
> 
> "Sport treiben" sounds awkward, too, but I know what it means.
> 
> Warum gehst du heute in die Sporthalle?
> Na, weil ich _da_ Sport treiben will.




"Treiben" can't really be directly translated into English in this case.  We normally say "do sports" or "play sports."  

"Go in," though, indicates that movement toward a place...


----------



## enzodava

Regarding the expression "go in for sports..." 

In this context I think we're talking about an expression from British English. "to go in for something" essentially means to like doing something or to want do something. Not being from the "home country" I'm afraid to give an example, in case I should sound like a silly Yank, but here's an attempt:

--I could go in for an ice cream right now.
--He doesn't really go in for video games.

I know I've heard the expression in this context before, but _never _spoken by an American. 

Feedback from any Brits out there?


----------



## elroy

enzodava said:
			
		

> Regarding the expression "go in for sports..."
> 
> In this context I think we're talking about an expression from British English. "to go in for something" essentially means to like doing something or to want do something. Not being from the "home country" I'm afraid to give an example, in case I should sound like a silly Yank, but here's an attempt:
> 
> --I could go in for an ice cream right now.
> --He doesn't really go in for video games.
> 
> I know I've heard the expression in this context before, but _never _spoken by an American.
> 
> Feedback from any Brits out there?



Oohhh... that would make sense then, especially in the context of "Sport treiben"!


----------



## gaer

enzodava said:
			
		

> Regarding the expression "go in for sports..."
> 
> In this context I think we're talking about an expression from British English. "to go in for something" essentially means to like doing something or to want do something. Not being from the "home country" I'm afraid to give an example, in case I should sound like a silly Yank, but here's an attempt:
> 
> --I could go in for an ice cream right now.
> --He doesn't really go in for video games.
> 
> I know I've heard the expression in this context before, but _never _spoken by an American.
> 
> Feedback from any Brits out there?


This is a quick, not well thought-out answer, but I would say:

--I could go for an ice cream right now.

I don't think I say this commonly, but perhaps Americans leave out the "in". But I agree, I definitely recognize this "go in for" usage, so I've heard it and read it.

Gaer


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Yeah, you're right. I think I'd say "can" in either case because even in the context of asking permission what you're really asking is whether you're now able to play sports again.


Good point!


> Sometimes when someone asks me "Can I have a drink?" or something similar, I'll say "You may," just because that's more natural to me than "You can," but then I worry the person might think I'm being condescending (you know, like when teachers go, "You _may_," emphasizing the correct usage of the term - or even worse, "I don't know, can you?"), but so far I haven't had any major issues.


Well, I answer:

"Sure!"  

Gaer


----------



## Whodunit

enzodava said:
			
		

> Regarding the expression "go in for sports..."
> 
> In this context I think we're talking about an expression from British English. "to go in for something" essentially means to like doing something or to want do something. Not being from the "home country" I'm afraid to give an example, in case I should sound like a silly Yank, but here's an attempt:
> 
> --I could go in for an ice cream right now.
> --He doesn't really go in for video games.
> 
> I know I've heard the expression in this context before, but _never _spoken by an American.
> 
> Feedback from any Brits out there?



Hm, okay. Thanks for the reply.

Gaer: Why isn't this post well though-out?


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> This is a quick, not well thought-out answer, but I would say:
> 
> --I could go for an ice cream right now.
> 
> I don't think I say this commonly, but perhaps Americans leave out the "in". But I agree, I definitely recognize this "go in for" usage, so I've heard it and read it.
> 
> Gaer



We would use this to mean "I really feel like an ice cream RIGHT NOW."

I don't know if that's quite the same....


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Good point!
> 
> Well, I answer:
> 
> "Sure!"
> 
> Gaer



Way to avoid embarrassment, right?


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Hm, okay. Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Gaer: Why isn't this post well though-out?


Who, I looked at the post you referred to, and I don't see anything wrong, so I don't understand your question. 

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Who, I looked at the post you referred to, and I don't see anything wrong, so I don't understand your question.
> 
> Gaer



I think he meant to ask you why you thought it wasn't well thought-out.   

I think you said that as a precautionary measure, right?  Just in case what you said wasn't totally accurate?


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> Way to avoid embarrassment, right?


Actually, no. If someone asks me if he may/can do something, I think I usually leave out the verb in my reply:

Sure, no problem.
Sure, go ahead.
Why not?
By all means.
I don't see any reason why not.

There's no reason NOT to answer with the verb, and we both may be over-thinking this (as so often happens), but I think we tend to answer (informally) in a way that is friendly but short.

I believe that the moment I start using "may", either to ask a question or to answer it, I'm becoming self-concious or at least a bit formal. Is it different for you?

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Actually, no. If someone asks me if he may/can do something, I think I usually leave out the verb in my reply:
> 
> Sure, no problem.
> Sure, go ahead.
> Why not?
> By all means.
> I don't see any reason why not.
> 
> There's no reason NOT to answer with the verb, and we both may be over-thinking this (as so often happens), but I think we tend to answer (informally) in a way that is friendly but short.
> 
> I believe that the moment I start using "may", either to ask a question or to answer it, I'm becoming self-concious or at least a bit formal. Is it different for you?
> 
> Gaer



No, not usually...and I agree with everything you're saying.

I like to diversify my replies, though, so sometimes I'll say "You may."  Very rarely, though.  And usually it doesn't cause any problems.  I just feel that theoretically the person might feel that I'm trying to correct their usage of "can."  That's all, though; it's just a question of variety and the risks that might come with it!


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> I think he meant to ask you why you thought it wasn't well thought-out.
> 
> I think you said that as a precautionary measure, right? Just in case what you said wasn't totally accurate?


Okay. But as I've said repeatedly, these stupid blue windows are the course of endless confusion. Even when you go to reply to one message, part of the logic is gone. And our threads are getting longer now, so I am having a harder and harder time trying to keep up with all that is going on. 

In short, I'm totally confused!  

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Okay. But as I've said repeatedly, these stupid blue windows are the course of endless confusion. Even when you go to reply to one message, part of the logic is gone. And our threads are getting longer now, so I am having a harder and harder time trying to keep up with all that is going on.
> 
> In short, I'm totally confused!
> 
> Gaer



This is the comment Who was referring to:



> This is a quick, not well thought-out answer, but I would say:


----------



## gaer

elroy said:
			
		

> This is the comment Who was referring to:


Okay. I DIMLY remember typing that. I got a wicked headache Sunday morning and finally got rid of it tonight, about 60 hours later, so you can understand my irritation at having to search back and back through threads.

Thanks for your clarification. I've got it now!

Gaer


----------



## elroy

gaer said:
			
		

> Okay. I DIMLY remember typing that. I got a wicked headache Sunday morning and finally got rid of it tonight, about 60 hours later, so you can understand my irritation at having to search back and back through threads.
> 
> Thanks for your clarification. I've got it now!
> 
> Gaer



No problem.    Glad it's clear now.


----------



## Whodunit

gaer said:
			
		

> Okay. I DIMLY remember typing that. I got a wicked headache Sunday morning and finally got rid of it tonight, about 60 hours later, so you can understand my irritation at having to search back and back through threads.
> 
> Thanks for your clarification. I've got it now!
> 
> Gaer



And? Are you still remember what you meant by "this post is not well though-out"? Sorry to have made such a confusion.


----------

