# Jemand steigt vor dem Kaufhaus aus



## Miguel_Classical

Hello,

Could someone please explain the use of 'dem' in this sentence? 

*Warten Sie! Jemand steigt vor dem Kaufhaus aus.
*
Shouldn't it be 'den' since motion and direction are expressed?

Thanks


----------



## Cliff Barnes

Der Dativ ist mit einem nicht zielgerichteten, statischen Zustand verbunden (Frage: _wo?_).
canoonet - Präposition: Präpositionen mit zwei Kasus


----------



## Demiurg

Miguel_Classical said:


> Shouldn't it be 'den' since motion and direction are expressed?



"Kaufhaus" is neuter, so "den" would be wrong in any case (pun intended).


----------



## bearded

Miguel_Classical said:


> motion and direction are expressed


Motion and direction are not expressed.  Wo (not  wohin) steigst du aus?  In English you wouldn't say _where *to* are you getting off, _would you?


----------



## Frank78

Perhaps it'll get clearer if add a means of transportation:

Jemand steigt _vor dem Kaufhaus _*aus dem Bus* aus. = Someone's getting *out of the bus* _in front of the department store_.
Jemand steigt _vor dem Kaufhaus_ *in den Bus *ein. = Someone's getting *on the bus* _in front of the department store_.

vor dem Kaufhaus - is just the place where the action takes place
in den Bus - motion towards = accusative
aus dem Bus - motion from = dative



bearded said:


> _where *to* are you getting off_



Thank god, we have some context.


----------



## JClaudeK

Frank78 said:


> aus dem Bus - motion from = dative


anyway: "aus" < > always + dative 



Frank78 said:


> vor dem Kaufhaus - is just the place where the action takes place



"Wo (nicht: wohin!) spielt sich die Szene ab?"


----------



## Demiurg

But:

_Der Bus fährt vor das Kaufhaus. _ (accusative).


----------



## Schlabberlatz

You can also look here:
auf dem Feld (dative)


----------



## Minnesota Guy

Native speakers: Is there a context in which one would say *aussteigen vor *+ Acc.?


----------



## Frieder

Minnesota Guy said:


> Is there a context in which one would say *aussteigen vor *+ Acc.?



I tried hard to find one but I couldn't.


----------



## Minnesota Guy

Frieder said:


> I tried hard to find one but I couldn't.



Thanks, Frieder. Perhaps in this case, the deciding factor is the verb being used? My grammar (which devotes 14 pages to explaining these variable prepositions) says that with verbs of arriving, appearing, and disappearing, the preposition usually takes the dative. I wouldn't automatically think of *aussteigen* as a verb of arriving or appearing, but I can see how it might be considered one.


----------



## JClaudeK

Minnesota Guy said:


> Native speakers: Is there a context in which one would say *aussteigen vor *+ Acc.?


Sorry, but I'm not sure to understand what you mean.

The usual preposition used with "aussteigen" is "aus".
Er steigt *aus* dem Auto/ dem Zug/ dem Bus/ .... (aus).

This can happen in different places:
Er steigt vor dem / am / hinter dem / beim Bahnhof (aus dem Wagen) aus.


----------



## Minnesota Guy

Hi JClaude--

Sorry if I was unclear. Since* aussteigen vor *was used in the OP, I was curious if that combination of verb + preposition could ever be used with the accusative. (The answer seems to be No.)

As far as how the verb is usually used, I think you've described it very well.


----------



## JClaudeK

Minnesota Guy said:


> Sorry if I was unclear.


It's my fault: I didn't pay attention to "aussteigen vor *+ Acc.*?"


----------



## elroy

What if you're on a long train with many cars, and you can exit out of one of two of them: the furthest one back, which is behind the shopping center, and the one on the opposite end, which is in front of it (so the train is parallel to the shopping center)?  Could you then use "vor oder hinter _das _Kaufhaus aussteigen," since the final position in relation to the shopping center would be the destination of the movement?


----------



## Gernot Back

elroy said:


> Could you then use "vor oder hinter _das _Kaufhaus aussteigen," since the final position in relation to the shopping center would be the destination of the movement?


No, I guess that would just sound as awkward as Bavarian ex prime minister Edmund Stoiber in his famous speech on a Transrapid connection between Munich Central and Munich Airport:


			
				Edmund Stoiber said:
			
		

> Sie steigen in den Hauptbahnhof ein, Sie fahren mit dem Transrapid in zehn Minuten an den Flughafen in ... an den Flughafen Franz Josef Strauß. Dann starten Sie praktisch hier am Hauptbahnhof in München.


Dokumentation: Edmund Stoibers unsterbliche Transrapid-Rede - WELT

Maybe you could say:

_Der Inhaftierte stieg aus dem Gefängnis in die angrenzende Münchner Straße aus._​
... in order to exclude other possible destination streets surrounding the prison compound.


----------



## manfy

Another colloquial borderline case might be: "Sie stieg *vom* Zug auf *den* Bahnsteig aus".
But that's a mix of "vom Zug aussteigen" and "auf den Bahnsteig steigen", so it should be considered bad style and probably it's ungrammatical.


----------



## bearded

Gernot Back said:


> _Der Inhaftierte stieg aus dem Gefängnis in die angrenzende Münchner Straße aus._


In this sentence, the verb 'aussteigen' (to be released) has a different meaning from the more usual ''aus dem Bus aussteigen'', and can apparently admit an accusative case. But I wonder if ...._stieg aus dem Gefängnis in der angrenzenden Münchner Straße aus  _would be at all possible, or would express a different meaning.
And I enjoyed ''Sie steigen in den Hauptbahnhof ein''.


----------



## Gernot Back

bearded said:


> ut I wonder if ...._stieg aus dem Gefängnis in der angrenzenden Münchner Straße aus _would be at all possible


_Das Gefängnis in der Münchner Straße_ would be the official address of the prison, not necessarily the destination of the jailbreak. The additional adjective _angrenzende _would be irritating in this context: _woran angrenzend?_, _bordering what? _It is self-understood that buildings border the street indicated in their address.


----------



## bearded

Gernot Back said:


> _Das Gefängnis in der Münchner Straße_ would be the official address of the prison, not necessarily the destination of the jailbreak. The additional adjective _angrenzende _would be irritating in this context: _woran angrenzend?_, _bordering what? _It is self-understood that buildings border the street indicated in their address.


Ganz klar, danke schön.  I had associated _stieg..aus _with _in der Straße_, and hadn't thought of _das Gefängnis in der..Straße_ which is of course the default connection. My bad.


----------



## Kajjo

elroy said:


> "vor oder hinter _das _Kaufhaus aussteigen,"


No, we would use "vor oder hinter dem Kaufhaus". "Das" sounds simply wrong.


----------



## elroy

Kajjo said:


> "Das" sounds simply wrong.


 So is this another case of “That’s just the way it is”?


----------



## berndf

Miguel_Classical said:


> Hello,
> 
> Could someone please explain the use of 'dem' in this sentence?
> 
> *Warten Sie! Jemand steigt vor dem Kaufhaus aus.
> *
> Shouldn't it be 'den' since motion and direction are expressed?
> 
> Thanks


The zillionth time in this forum where someone has been mislead by this "motion" heuristic. It really does more harm then good.


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> Could you then use "vor oder hinter _das _Kaufhaus aussteigen," since the final position in relation to the shopping center


Not with the verb _aussteigen_. The _Ziel der Handlung_ is already expressed by the prefix _aus_  (_to get out of the car_). The verb has no free valence to express a destination. _Er stieg vor das Kaufhaus_ would conceivable, though I can't think of a plausible context right now.

The border line cases discussed above _could_ be considered valid, because they relate in a more direct way the the action of _stepping out of the car _(on*to* the platform).


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> (on*to* the platform)


 I don't see the fundamental difference between that and "in front of the shopping center" (as a destination). 

Put it in front of the table. = Setze es vor den Tisch. 

What's the difference?


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> I don't see the fundamental difference between that and "in front of the shopping center" (as a destination).
> 
> Put it in front of the table. = Setze es vor den Tisch.
> 
> What's the difference?


Different verb. Different semantic. Different valences.

If the _onto_ thing is a red herring, ignore it. It really only served to explain the border line cases because stepping out of the car is the same thing as stepping onto the platform. That's all I tried to say.

The important thing is that the accusative must be a valence of the verb. _Aussteigen_ has no free destinative valence.


----------



## elroy

berndf said:


> stepping out of the car is the same thing as stepping onto the platform


 Why can't stepping out of the car be the same as stepping in front of the shopping center (or whatever)?


----------



## berndf

elroy said:


> Why can't stepping out of the car be the same as stepping in front of the shopping center (or whatever)?


If we say it is a border line case then this means that only 99.99% awkward and not 100%:


manfy said:


> But that's a mix of "vom Zug aussteigen" and "auf den Bahnsteig steigen", so it should be considered bad style and probably it's ungrammatical.


You really can't stretch it any further.


----------



## manfy

elroy said:


> Why can't stepping out of the car be the same as stepping in front of the shopping center (or whatever)?


My guess is that this happens for the same reason why you can't always do that in English either:
_"I stepped out of the car in front of the shopping center" -> Ich stieg vor dem Kaufhaus aus dem Zug aus._ (2x dative)

If you want to change the meaning you need to repeat the verb with a different preposition (which is basically not much different than using an alternate prefixed verb in German):
_"I stepped out of the car and stepped in front of the shopping center" -> Ich stieg aus dem Zug aus und trat vor das Kaufhaus_. (dative + accusative)

Of course there are some forms that allow "contraction of SVO pairs" (that's probably not the proper grammar term!) - but then, we have the same in German provided the verb meanings do match up:
_"I stepped out of the car onto the platform." -> Ich stieg aus dem/vom Zug auf den Bahnsteig._
Here the verb is 'steigen' - not 'aussteigen'(!!) - and the more specific meanings are added with prepositions rather than verb prefixes. 'Aus dem Zug steigen' and 'auf den Bahnsteig steigen' are perfectly normal uses of 'steigen'.

I guess, the main reason for this confusion between German and English is that English has largely dropped prefixed verbs and replaced or merged them with verb + preposition; a number of phrasal verbs with prepositions remain, but unfortunately they are quite often false friends of the literal German counterpart.

aussteigen [aus dem Zug] ≠ step out (phrasal verb) or step out of (verb + prepositions)
aussteigen [aus dem Zug] is semantically and functionally closer to 'to get off [the train]' or 'to exit [the train]'


----------

