# coming in/going out



## Serdja

So, I try to translate few sentances, but I'm just wondering which translations are correct.

''I'm coming into his room.'' Ich komme in sein Zimmer herein.
                               Ich komme in sein Zimmer hinein.
                                 Ich betrete sein Zimmer. 

 Any other possiblities to write this?

''I'm not going to go out of my apartment'': Ich gehe nicht aus der Wohnung heraus.
                                                        Ich gehe nicht aus der Wohnung hinaus.
                                                         Ich gehe nicht raus(ich weiss es ist umgangsprachlich)

           ''Come in!''                  Komme herein.


----------



## Frieder

> ''I'm coming into his room.''
> Ich komme gehe in sein Zimmer herein.
> Ich komme gehe in sein Zimmer hinein.
> Ich betrete sein Zimmer.



hinein gehen
heraus kommen



> ''I'm not going to go out of my apartment'':
> Ich gehe nicht aus der Wohnung heraus.
> Ich gehe nicht aus der Wohnung hinaus.
> Ich gehe nicht raus(ich weiß es ist umgangsprachlich)OK



Hinaus gehen
Herein kommen

Auch: Ich verlasse meine Wohnung nicht.



> ''Come in!''                  Komm herein.



Imperativ von _kommen_: komm, kommt.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Frieder, why do you rule out sentences like 

_Ich komme in sein Zimmer hinein. (Da sehe ich die Bescherung.)
Ich gehe nicht aus der Wohnung heraus. (Außer zum Einkaufen, wie eben jetzt.)


_It's a question of perspective. And please spell as one word infinitives like _hinausgehen_ and _​hereinkommen.



_PS 
Serdja's _I'm coming into his room. - Ich komme in sein Zimmer. _I wouldn't normally prefix the verb in the first place.

Serdja's _I'm not going to go out of my apartment. - Ich *werde* nicht aus meiner Wohnung hinausgehen.


_Serdja, you wrote _''Come in!'' __Komme herein._

_Komme_ is correct yet I know of no one that uses it. We say _Komm herein (_or_ Kommen Sie herein)._

Actually, we hardly say either one. The normal form is a one-word _Herein!_


----------



## Serdja

Vielen Dank!

Können Sie mir bitte noch ein bisschen erklären:

Wo liegt der Unterschied zwischen:

hineinkommen und hereinkommen?

Beide würden umgangssprachlich mittles "reinkommen" ausgedrückt werden, also, ich vermute, dass sie dieselbe Bedeutung haben...

Ich habe viel darüber im Internet gesucht und habe gehört, dass es nur um stylische Verschiedenkeit geht....

Könnte ich auch sagen "Ich werde nicht aus der Wohnung gehen" statt "Ich werde nicht aus der Wohnung hinausgehen?


----------



## Schimmelreiter

_kommen _und _gehen _sind ausreichend. Die Präpositionen _in + Akk. _und _aus + Dat. _erledigen das Übrige.
Durch Präfigierung wird die Perspektive fixiert, die ohne Präfigierung unklar bleibt oder sich aus dem Kontext erschließt:

_heraus-/hinein- _Perspektive von außen
_hinaus-/herein- _Perspektive von innen

Beispiele: 
A und B sind *im *Haus/Zimmer. A zu B: _Geh hinaus!_
A ist *im *Haus/Zimmer, B ist *​außerhalb *des Hauses/Zimmers. B zu A: _Komm heraus!_


----------



## bearded

Hallo Schimmelreiter
Alles klar mit _hinausgehen_ und _hereinkommen._ Die Probleme beginnen mit _ich komme in sein Zimmer hinein_ (Deine #3). 'Kommen' bedeutet normalerweise 'herkommen', also sich hier annähern. Für Ausländer stellt _hinkommen_ ein Problem dar. Dasselbe wäre mit _hergehen_ der Fall. Also keine Schwierigkeit mit Deinen Perspektive-Beispielen (geh hinaus/komm heraus) , aber wohl mit 'komm hinein'. Bedeuten _kommen _und _gehen_ denn einfach 'sich begeben' ohne Angabe einer Richtung?


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Bei englischsprachiger Referenz kann ich das Problem nicht erkennen, da sich _gehen_ zu _kommen_ wie _go _zu _come_ verhält.


bearded man said:


> Die Probleme beginnen mit _ich komme in sein Zimmer hinein_


_Als ich in sein Zimmer (hinein)kam, sah ich die Leiche.__ - When I came into his room, I saw the dead body._


bearded man said:


> Für Ausländer stellt _hinkommen_ ein Problem dar.


_Als ich hinkam, sah ich den angerichteten Schaden. - When I came there, I saw the damage done._


bearded man said:


> Dasselbe wäre mit _hergehen_ der Fall.


_Er ging zu mir (her). - He went to me._
vgl. _Er ging zu ihr (hin). - He went to her._

Und was die romanischen Sprachen anbelangt: _gehen _verhält sich zu _kommen_, wie _ire_ zu _venire_. Habt Ihr Euch  denn davon wegentwickelt?


----------



## bearded

@ Schimmelreiter
Danke für die schnelle Antwort. Bist du ganz sicher, dass auf Englisch _he went to me_ richtig ist? Ich würde sagen _he came to me_. Was romanische Sprachen angeht, so kann man sicherlich sagen _vengo da te / vengo lì _(wo du schon bist), aber niemals _vado qui (ich gehe her)._ Normalerweise bedeutet _andare/aller_ sich vom Sprechenden entfernen, und _venire/venir _sich an ihn nähern. Meine Latein-Erinnerungen sagen mir, dass _venite ad me_ richtig, _ite/vadete ad me_ falsch ist. Wir haben uns kaum davon wegentwickelt. Ich habe einen Zweifel: kannst Du (können die Deutschen) diese Schwierigkeit denn überhaupt nicht wahrnehmen/spüren?
EDIT  Ich möchte hinzufügen, dass ich (und viele Ausländer auch, denke ich) Deinen Beispielssatz _when I came into his room_ entweder mit_ als ich in sein Zimmer hereinkam _oder mit _als ich in sein Zimmer hineinging _übersetzen würde(n).  Das Problem fängt erst an, wenn die Deutschen _als ich in sein Zimmer hineinkam _sagen, was für Euch offenbar ganz normal klingt.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Das reine _Geh!_ - so wie das reine _Go!_ - bedeutet natürlich _Geh weg!_
Und das reine _Komm!_ - so wie das reine _Come!_ - bedeutet _Komm her!_

Sprache wird aber doch erst durch Modifikation interessant.
_
Venit in oppidum. He came into the town. Er kam in die Stadt. _
Das muss doch nicht *meine *Stadt sein. Das kann doch eine Bewegung von mir, dem Betrachter, weg sein.

_He went to me:_
Es geht ja nicht darum, ob _He came to me_ (also das Standardmodell) geht. Es geht darum, ob _He went to me_ auch geht: _He went to my house/He went to my website_. 

Und wenn schon, dann liegt's an der diachronen Veränderung des Englischen, nicht am Deutschen: _go_ ist abstrakt geworden, vgl. _He walked to me.



_


bearded man said:


> Ich möchte hinzufügen, dass ich (und viele Ausländer auch, denke ich) Deinen Beispielssatz _when I came into his room_ entweder mit_ als ich in sein Zimmer hereinkam _oder mit _als ich in sein Zimmer hineinging _übersetzen würde(n). Das Problem fängt erst an, wenn die Deutschen _als ich in sein Zimmer hineinkam _sagen, was für Euch offenbar ganz normal klingt.


Bei _*herein*kommen_ befindet sich der Betrachter *im *Zimmer, bei *hinein*_kommen_ *außerhalb* des Zimmers. 
Sieh Dir bitte _Er kam in die Stadt (hinein) _an, das ist auch von außen betrachtet. Wenn Du als Betrachter in der Stadt bist, kannst Du _Er kam in die Stadt (herein) _sagen. Die Klammern bezeichnen die Fakultativität der Präfigierung: Wenn der Kontext für Klarheit sorgt, entfällt sie oft.

Oder Du lässt die Umstandsbestimmung _(in die Stadt)_ weg: _Er kam herein. _(von innen betrachtet) - _Er kam hinein. _(von außen betrachtet).
_Hat der Schlüssel gepasst? Bist Du hineingekommen?_
Hier ist _hereingekommen_ unlogisch: Hätte der Schlüssel nicht gepasst, wäre der/die Angesprochene nicht _herinnen_. Er/Sie muss aber _herinnen_ sein, sonst könnte die Frage nicht _*herein*gekommen_ enthalten.


----------



## Serdja

Schimmelreiter said:


> Bei englischsprachiger Referenz kann ich das Problem nicht erkennen, da sich _gehen_ zu _kommen_ wie _go _zu _come_ verhält.
> 
> _Als ich in sein Zimmer (hinein)kam, sah ich die Leiche.__ - When I came into his room, I saw the dead body._
> 
> _Als ich hinkam, sah ich den angerichteten Schaden. - When I came there, I saw the damage done._
> 
> _Er ging zu mir (her). - He went to me._
> vgl. _Er ging zu ihr (hin). - He went to her._
> 
> Und was die romanischen Sprachen anbelangt: _gehen _verhält sich zu _kommen_, wie _ire_ zu _venire_. Habt Ihr Euch  denn davon wegentwickelt?



Danke.

Aber, könnte ich auch schreiben: Als ich hineinkam, sah ich den...

Und können sie bitte herkommen erklären... Einmal, habe ich gehört, dass jemand sagte, "Dies ist wo ich herkomme". Ich bin mir nicht sicher, was soll das überhaupt bedeuten.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Serdja said:


> Als ich hineinkam, sah ich den...


_Als ich hineinkam, sah ich den Einbrecher. _


Serdja said:


> Dies ist wo ich herkomme


_Dies ist*,* wo ich herkomme. - von einem Ort herkommen - __This is where I come from.
_
Hohes Sprachregister: _Dies ist, woher ich komme. _(Zeigt auf Staub.) - _Dies ist, wohin ich gehe. _​(Zeigt auf Staub.)


----------



## Serdja

Hm, wo liegt der Unterschied zwischen "hineinkam" und hinkam"?

Also, kann herkommen auch bedeuten: to go to someone...?

z.B: Kannst du bitte herkommen? (Can you please come here?)


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Serdja said:


> wo liegt der Unterschied zwischen "hineinkam" und hinkam"


_come in(to)_ vs. _come there_

_When he came in, he saw .../When he came into the house, he saw ..._
vs.
_When he came there, he saw ..._




Serdja said:


> Kannst du bitte herkommen? (Can you please come here?)








PS
The problem  with modern English and _(__come) in(to) _is that it doesn't distinguish anymore between 
_herein/hereinto _(i.e. German _herein_)
and 
_therein/thereinto_ (i.e. German _hinein_).


----------



## popotla

*"It's a question of perspective*." Yes, indeed, and bearded man's question/comment hits the nail right on the head, as does Schimmelreiter's reply.

_1. Als ich in sein Zimmer (hinein)kam, sah ich die Leiche. - When I came into his room, I saw the dead body.
_
_2. ls ich hinkam, sah ich den angerichteten Schaden. - When I came there, I saw the damage done.

__3. Er ging zu mir (her). - He went to me.

_In English, #1 can be said or written (I believe) only if the speaker/writer is saying/writing that _while he is in that person's ("his") room_.

#2. "When I came there" is impossible. (It has to be either w_hen I went there _or_ when I came here)_.

#3. This is odd, at best. I'm asking myself how it might work. "I was at home in Moscow and the doorbell rang. I opened the door and there was my ex-wife. She went to me and .............. ." Surely it doesn't work. "She came to me and ............... ."

For an English speaker, the concept of "For the speaker, _go _denotes here to there; _come_ denotes there to here" is deeply embedded and it's quite hard (for this speaker) to use _kommen_to mean "from here to there". Yes, German is different and so one must deal with that.

That said, I don't know whether _kommen _and _gehen _are sometimes freely interchangeable. E.g. (I'm speaking while at home) Morgen _gehe_ ich ins Kino / Morgen _komme_ ich ins Kino. Are both possible, without a change of meaning?

A similar problem arises with "Kannst du Hans zur Schule bringen?" In English I can say _bring_ only if I'm at the school and my wife is at home (for example). If we're both at home, it must be "Can you take Hans to school?"

Perhaps this, like _kommen/gehen_, is an example of a "false friend". Does BRINGEN mean "to accompany something or someone to some other place, regardless of direction"?
And do _kommen _and _gehen_ both mean "to move oneself from one place to another, regardless of direction"?


----------



## bearded

@ Schimmelreiter
Vielen Dank für die aufschlussreichen Erklärungen. Wie ich seit langem schon vermutete, kann die deutsche Sprache mit _kommen_ und _gehen_ etwas elastischer umgehen, was Präfixe anbelangt, als die romanischen Sprachen es tun.  So schreibst Du z.B: unter #9 ''er kam hinein (von außen betrachtet)''.  In einem solchen Fall sagen wir ''er ging hinein''.  Sehr interessant jedenfalls.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

popotla said:


> "When I came there" is impossible.


_When I came there, I found the young creature almost starved._

Daniel Defoe, _Robinson Crusoe_


----------



## bearded

Schimmelreiter said:


> _When I came there, I found the young creature almost starved._
> 
> Daniel Defoe, _Robinson Crusoe_


In this example, 'came' rather corresponds to 'arrived', not meaning 'came towards the speaker', and English and German often are similar to each other with respect to this usage.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

bearded man said:


> In this example, 'came' rather corresponds to 'arrived', not meaning 'came towards the speaker', and English and German often are similar to each other with respect to this usage.


Don't _come_, _kommen_ and _venire_ all have an implication of _arrive _(which of course means _ad ripam *venire*_​)?

_*
Veni* vidi vici

I came there/thither, I arrived


_Your insisting on how different Romance languages are prompted me earlier to assume they might have departed from their roots.


----------



## popotla

It's interesting, Schmittelreiter, that you find something you wish to contradict but have nothing to say about the rest. I hadn't realised that the forum, like any forum, can be used as a place in which to score (or try to score) points. (Yes, "came there/come there" can fit in at least one other context but not, for example, as in _We haven't any bread so I'd better come to the baker's (_move myself from here to there_)_ // _This afternoon I think I'll come to the Tiergarten_ (move myself from here to there).


----------



## Schimmelreiter

My point is that, essentially, English and German are *not* different when it comes to_ go/come/gehen/kommen.
_


popotla said:


> _We haven't any bread so I'd better come to the baker's (_move myself from here to there_)_ // _This afternoon I think I'll come to the Tiergarten_ (move myself from here to there).


_kommen _is just as impossible as _come_ in the above sentences.

I'd be interested to know whether, from the perspective of a group of people who are now at the zoo, you would rule out that one of those people might call somebody 20 miles away, asking them _Wouldn't you also like to come to the zoo to see the baby elephant?_ And mightn't the other person say _I'm afraid I can't come._ Or are you saying s/he must say _I'm afraid I can't go._


----------



## bearded

@ popotla
In the forum it happens that members disagree on a subject, but debating such points is useful to both (or all) parties concerned, through comparison of the different points of view: but we usually remain on very friendly terms with each other or - as Italian politicians would put it - we are all a big happy family.

@ Schimmelreiter
I feel that I owe you some clarifying elements. Romance languages, like Latin did, possess verbs like entrare/entrer, uscire/sortir, arrivare/arriver, etc., similar to German eingehen-ausgehen-gelangen, etc. If you only use those verbs, no problem of specifying hin or her exist.
Egli è arrivato qui / egli è arrivato là : both correct.
But these languages also have the possibility to express the same actions and meanings by using verbs like andare(gehen), venire(kommen) + motion particles which correspond to German particles herein/hinein, heraus/hinaus, etc. Io vengo fuori: ich komme heraus, io vado fuori: ich gehe hinaus,etc. Now, here the liberty (Spielraum) is more restricted than in German: as I tried to explain above, 'er kam ins Zimmer hinein' sounds strange to us, because if we translate 'è venuto dentro la stanza' it means that the speaking person is in the room, otherwise it is necessary to say 'è andato dentro la stanza': If we say 'è entrato nella stanza', then the position of the observer - other than in German - is not specified. You have, of course, similar cases: if you say ''er ist in der Stadt gelangt/angekommen'', you affirm nothing about the observer/speaker's position. In general, it seems to me that German can operate more freely with those movement particles, than we 'Romans' do. A comparison with Latin is not at all simple, and I would leave extinct languages aside..


----------



## Schimmelreiter

bearded man said:


> @ popotla
> In the forum it happens that members disagree on a subject, but debating such points is useful to both (or all) parties concerned, through comparison of the different points of view: but we usually remain on very friendly terms with each other or - as Italian politicians would put it - we are all a big happy family.
> 
> @ Schimmelreiter
> I feel that I owe you some clarifying elements. Romance languages, like Latin did, possess verbs like entrare/entrer, uscire/sortir, arrivare/arriver, etc., similar to German eingehen-ausgehen-gelangen, etc. If you only use those verbs, no problem of specifying hin or her exist.
> Egli è arrivato qui / egli è arrivato là : both correct.
> But these languages also have the possibility to express the same actions and meanings by using verbs like andare(gehen), venire(kommen) + motion particles which correspond to German particles herein/hinein, heraus/hinaus, etc. Io vengo fuori: ich komme heraus, io vado fuori: ich gehe hinaus,etc. Now, here the liberty (Spielraum) is more restricted than in German: as I tried to explain above, 'er kam ins Zimmer hinein' sounds strange to us, because if we translate 'è venuto dentro la stanza' it means that the speaking person is in the room, otherwise it is necessary to say 'è andato dentro la stanza': If we say 'è entrato nella stanza', then the position of the observer - other than in German - is not specified. You have, of course, similar cases: if you say ''er ist in der Stadt gelangt/angekommen'', you affirm nothing about the observer/speaker's position. In general, it seems to me that German can operate more freely with those movement particles, than we 'Romans' do. A comparison with Latin is not at all simple, and I would leave extinct languages aside..


Thank you very, very much. Also for what you said to popotla. It's a pity we can't go have a beer together, the three of us.


----------



## popotla

I am not trying to write a treatise about "come/go in English" and am fully aware, as you are, of the difference when one is on the phone. With my examples (1) _We haven't any bread so I'd better come to the baker's (_move myself from here to there_) and (2) __This afternoon I think I'll come to the Tiergarten_ (move myself from here to there) I chose to limit myself to a particular context, making that limitation clear, I hoped, by my (repeated) comment in brackets. As I say, I'm not trying to write a treatise but to say that there are instances in German-which I have, at least to some extent specified- that contradict my "natural sense" of some of the main ways in which come and go are used in English.

I don't agree that "English and German are *not* different when it comes to_ go/come/gehen/kommen"._ If there was no difference, the matter wouldn't have troubled me for the past couple of years.

I previously noted and asked, as follows:

For an English speaker, the concept of "For the speaker, _go _denotes here to there; _come_ denotes there to here" is deeply embedded and it's quite hard (for this speaker) to use _kommen _to mean "from here to there". Yes, German is different and so one must deal with that.

 That said, I don't know whether _kommen _and _gehen _are sometimes freely interchangeable. E.g. (I'm speaking while at home) Morgen _gehe_ ich ins Kino / Morgen _komme_ ich ins Kino. Are both possible, without a change of meaning?

 A similar problem arises with "Kannst du Hans zur Schule bringen?" In English I can say _bring_ only if I'm at the school and my wife is at home (for example). If we're both at home, it must be "Can you take Hans to school?"

 Perhaps this, like _kommen/gehen_, is an example of a "false friend". Does BRINGEN mean "to accompany something or someone to some other place, regardless of direction"?
 And do _kommen _and _gehen_ both mean "to move oneself from one place to another, regardless of direction"?
_
[Yes, German is different and so one must deal with that, _I wrote, but Schmimmelreiter says "no, not different".]

I think it better to seek my answers elsewhere.


----------



## popotla

I am not trying to write a treatise about "come/go in English" and am fully aware, as you are, of the difference when one is on the phone. With my examples (1) _We haven't any bread so I'd better come to the baker's (_move myself from here to there_) and (2) __This afternoon I think I'll come to the Tiergarten_ (move myself from here to there) I chose to limit myself to a particular context, making that limitation clear, I hoped, by my (repeated) comment in brackets. As I say, I'm not trying to write a treatise but to say that there are instances in German-which I have, at least to some extent specified- that contradict my "natural sense" of some of the main ways in which come and go are used in English.

 I don't agree that "English and German are *not* different when it comes to_ go/come/gehen/kommen"._ If there was no difference, the matter wouldn't have troubled me for the past couple of years.

 I previously noted and asked, as follows:

 For an English speaker, the concept of "For the speaker, _go _denotes here to there; _come_ denotes there to here" is deeply embedded and it's quite hard (for this speaker) to use _kommen _to mean "from here to there". Yes, German is different and so one must deal with that.

That said, I don't know whether _kommen _and _gehen _are sometimes freely interchangeable. E.g. (I'm speaking while at home) Morgen _gehe_ ich ins Kino / Morgen _komme_ ich ins Kino. Are both possible, without a change of meaning?

 A similar problem arises with "Kannst du Hans zur Schule bringen?" In English I can say _bring_ only if I'm at the school and my wife is at home (for example). If we're both at home, it must be "Can you take Hans to school?"

Perhaps this, like _kommen/gehen_, is an example of a "false friend". Does BRINGEN mean "to accompany something or someone to some other place, regardless of direction"?
 And do _kommen _and _gehen_ both mean "to move oneself from one place to another, regardless of direction"?

So far, no answers to any of that.
_
 [Yes, German is different and so one must deal with that, _I wrote, but Schmimmelreiter says "no, not different".]

I think it better to seek my answers elsewhere.


----------



## Schimmelreiter

popotla said:


> Morgen _gehe_ ich ins Kino / Morgen _komme_ ich ins Kino. Are both possible, without a change of meaning?


No, they are not, neither are they in English. 

You're trying to prove that German and English are different with regard to _go/come/gehen/kommen_. You have every right to do so. Why not wait for others to comment. By the way, I’d like to suggest we not discuss _bringen_ within this thread. I suggest we concentrate on _gehen/kommen._




popotla said:


> And do _kommen_ and _gehen_ both mean "to move oneself from one place to another, regardless of direction"?


I wrote this:


Schimmelreiter said:


> Don't _come_, _kommen_ and _venire_ all have an implication of _arrive_ (which of course means _ad ripam_ *venire*​)?


Direction, to me, seems to be secondary. To me, the implied arrival is primary as far as _come_ is concerned. You’re an English native speaker. I’m a German native speaker. I’m now going to write down four sentences, two in German, two in English, of which I, for one, think the German ones are idiomatic, and I’d like to ask you to say whether the English ones are idiomatic, too:

_Die Polizisten fuhren/gingen zu jenem Haus. Sie kamen zu dem Haus und durchsuchten es._
_The police went to that house. They came to the house and searched it._


If, just if you should find the English sentences acceptable (if not, please just forget the rest of this question), mightn’t this be an indication that
(1) the primary difference between _gehen/go_ and _kommen/come_ is about arrival
(2) and English and German are not so dissimilar as far as this topic goes?




popotla said:


> I think it better to seek my answers elsewhere.


Just because you are dissatisfied with the contributions made to this thread so far? Why not wait for others to reply? How quickly and comprehensively and how much to your satisfaction do replies come on other forums?


----------



## Serdja

also, there were many things written here, I understood a lot, but I just want to check if I got everything correct.

Are all these sentences correct:

Als ich in sein Zimmer gekommen bin....
Als ich in seinem Zimmer angekommen bin...
Als ich in sein Zimmer hineingekommen bin...
Als ich sein Zimmer hingekommen bin...

Danke im Voraus!


----------



## Schimmelreiter

Serdja said:


> Als ich in sein Zimmer gekommen bin....







Serdja said:


> Als ich in seinem Zimmer angekommen bin...


My point, in the discussion _gehen vs. kommen_, that the latter, unlike the former, implies an element of arrival does not mean you can substitute _ankommen_ for it.





Serdja said:


> Als ich in sein Zimmer hineingekommen bin...


This is an option. It's not normally necessary, though, to prefix the verb. See what I wrote:


Schimmelreiter said:


> _I'm coming into his room. - Ich komme in sein Zimmer. _I wouldn't normally prefix the verb in the first place.





Schimmelreiter said:


> _kommen _und _gehen _sind ausreichend. Die Präpositionen _in + Akk. _und _aus + Dat. _erledigen das Übrige.
> Durch Präfigierung wird die Perspektive fixiert, die ohne Präfigierung unklar bleibt oder sich aus dem Kontext erschließt


So context will, more often than not, make it unnecessary and redundant to prefix the verb. Prefixing is of course necessary, though, if there's no adverbial such as _in sein Zimmer_:


Schimmelreiter said:


> _Als ich hineinkam, sah ich den Einbrecher._





Schimmelreiter said:


> _Hat der Schlüssel gepasst? Bist Du hineingekommen?_


In the latter sentence, there is, by the way, the extra implication of _managing to get in_.





Serdja said:


> Als ich sein Zimmer hingekommen bin...


_When I came there ..._
You could not possibly append _into his room_ to _When I came *there* ..._, could you? Neither can you take the correct clause _Als ich *hin*gekommen bin _and insert _room_: _there _equals_ hin-_

I wouldn't, however, rule out such extra information if there were the preposition _zu._ While the standard way of putting it would probably be

_Als die Polizei zum Tatort kam/gekommen ist ...

_I wouldn't rule out the following, either:

_Als die Polizei zum Tatort hinkam/hingekommen ist ...






_One extra remark, Serdja. This thread has very much been about _gehen vs. kommen._ What I wrote as to the admissability of _kommen_ in various context does not at all rule out _gehen_. 

_Als ich in sein Zimmer ging/gegangen bin ..._
_Als ich in sein Zimmer hineinging/hineingegangen bin ...
Als ich hineinging/hineingegangen bin

_are all perfect German clauses and certainly preferable in many an instance. When I write in defence of something, it's because I wouldn't like to see it ruled out as an option, it's not because I wish to rule out the alternatives that exist to it. So I pursue an inclusive approach rather than an exclusive one: I want for things to be included as "also possible".


----------



## Glockenblume

A little detail: "Als ich in seinem Zimmer angekommen bin", is possible but has another sense:
For  example: the little boy is crying suddenly very loudly. The  mother/father is leaving everything behind her/him and is running from  the back of the garden and is climbing 30 stairs as fast as possible to  her/his boy's room in order to see what is the matter. Later on, he is  saying:
"Als ich in seinem Zimmer angekommen bin, sehe ich eine große  schwarze Spinne im Zimmer." Here, "ankommen" would mean that the way to  the room seemed very long to the mother/father so that he points out the arrival.

But in general, the sentence "Als ich in seinem Zimmer angekommen bin" is indeed not very typical.-

                                      _____________________________________________________________

As for the rest, I agree with Schimmelreiter.
In German is "hin" and "her" which give the perspective related to the *speaker*.
_gehen_ and _kommen_ often give a perspective related to the *goal/aim/objective* (I don't know which English word is the right one) - in our example, this goal/aim/objective is the room.
These two kinds of perpectives are not necessarily linked.


----------



## Serdja

Vielen Dank alle, ich habe das begreifen.


----------

