# Are you who I think you are?



## GregorMcGinnis

How do you say "I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are" and "Are you who I think you are?" in German?


----------



## Frieder

GregorMcGinnis said:


> "I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are"



Es würde mich wirklich erschüttern, wenn du der wärst, den ich mir vorstelle.

This is not easy to translate - at least not literally. By the way: shouldn't it be "if you _were _who I think you are"?



GregorMcGinnis said:


> "Are you who I think you are?"



Bist du der, den ich mir vorstelle? 
Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?


----------



## perpend

Frieder said:


> Es würde mich wirklich erschüttern, wenn du der wärst, den ich mir vorstelle.
> 
> This is not easy to translate - at least not literally. By the way: shouldn't it be "if you _were _who I think you are"?
> 
> Bist du der, den ich mir vorstelle?
> Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?



"if you _were_ who I think you are" doesn't sound quite right to me, Frieder, and I can't explain why. I can see why you would think so, though, and I agree this is not easy to translate. There's a lot happening with tense.

What do you think about this: Ich wäre sehr überrascht, wenn du tatsächlich derjenige bist, den ich mir vor vorstelle.


----------



## manfy

Frieder said:


> Bist du der, den ich mir vorstelle?
> Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?


 
The second version is not possible with 'who'.
"Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?" is more like "Are you the type of person (that) I think you are?" or maybe "Are you what I think you are?" (in the right context)


----------



## djweaverbeaver

*...if you were who I think you are* doesn't make because you can't mix up the tenses.  It either has to be all in the present, as in the OP, or all in the past *...if you were who I thought you were*.
Furthermore, there is nothing hypothetical or counterfactual that would warrant or govern the use of a (past) subjunctive *were *here.

Expressed in the way that the OP has, you are taking your assumption to be true.

I'm not sure of the exact grammatical explanation of this, but it's definitely a great question to bring up in the English Only forum.

**EDIT**:  Actually, the more I think about it, the more I want to allow for what @Frieder's statement.   For this reason, I've started *a new thread* on this topic in the English Only forum, and we'll see what others think once they weigh in.  I want to make sure I'm giving out the right information.


----------



## manfy

I think, German and English have taken slightly different paths in their evolution of this structure.
In German it's not a major problem to mix Konjunktiv & Indikativ. In a more colloquial form I'd probably phrase it as:

Ich werd' verrückt, falls du bist, der ich glaube, dass du bist. 
(the structure sounds a bit strange ... but well, colloquial language is known to transcend the worldly limits of grammar rules from time to time ...)


----------



## perpend

manfy said:


> Ich werd' verrückt, falls du bist, der ich glaube, dass du bist.



I had to read it three times, but it does convey the meaning of the original poster. I think it's too advanced and colloquial (you did mention that).

EDIT: To make it more clear, there are two elements going on.
-- falls du bist
-- ich glaube, dass du der bist

And these get "verwürschelt".


----------



## elroy

manfy said:


> Ich werd' verrückt, falls du bist, der ich glaube, dass du bist.


 Tatsächlich?? Das klingt nun wirklich mehr als sonderbar. Zumindest in Deutschland würde ich das nicht einmal in der Umgangssprache erwarten. Ob es da vielleicht regionale Unterschiede gibt?


----------



## manfy

It's not entirely nonsensical, though!

Consider this:
..., falls du bist, der du zu sein scheinst.
Es scheint, dass du der(jenige) bist. = Ich glaube, dass du der(jenige) bist. => (kreativ) umgeformt: "... der ich glaube, dass du bist."

PS: Actually quite similar to "...der - mir scheint - du bist." or ...who methinks you are.


----------



## Dan2

GregorMcGinnis said:


> How do you say "I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are"


This sentence doesn't make sense to me.  How could you be shocked if something turns out to be true that you already _believe_ to be true?  (Note that it's "who *I think you are*", not "who I'm thinking you might be" or "Forced to guess, I'd say he's X, but I'd be shocked if I'm right."; these make sense.)  (Of course, this doesn't mean that the sentence can't be faithfully translated into another language.)  Anyway, given the uncertain logic, I can understand Frieder's wondering about "were" - a native might have made the same suggestion.


----------



## elroy

manfy said:


> ..., falls du bist, der du zu sein scheinst.


 I would say "falls du *der* bist, der du zu sein scheinst."  But I'm not a native speaker of course. 





manfy said:


> Ich werd' verrückt, falls du bist, der ich glaube, dass du bist.


 I think something approaching what I would consider grammatically correct would be "Ich werde verrückt, falls du *der* bist, *von dem* ich glaube, dass *du das bist*."  I'm not really sure about the last part, though.  Nothing I considered sounded okay.


----------



## perpend

GregorMcGinnis said:


> "I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are."



This sentence makes sense to me in American English. Maybe we need more context.


----------



## manfy

elroy said:


> I would say "falls du *der* bist, der du zu sein scheinst."  But I'm not a native speaker of course.


Yes, that's correct, too.
But mostly we'd prefer to drop the first 'der' and that would normally demand ""falls du bist, *wer* du zu sein scheinst."  " (but somehow I don't like this 'wer' in my suggested phrase)



elroy said:


> I think something approaching what I would consider grammatically correct would be "Ich werde verrückt, falls du *der* bist, *von dem* ich glaube, dass *du das bist*."  I'm not really sure about the last part, though.  Nothing I considered sounded okay.


It's harder than it looks, isn't it?

"von dem" doesn't quite work because "Ich glaube von dir, dass du das bist" has a slightly different meaning.
"... falls du bist, *für wen* ich dich halte" would work, but with 'glauben' it gets tricky.
In "Ich glaube, du bist der", "der" is nominative because of the copula 'sein' and I think this needs to be retained in the conversion.
cf. falls du bist, der du meiner Meinung nach bist. (Hier passt auch "falls du bist, *wer* du meiner Meinung nach bist.")

Hmm, strange language that German, innit?  How somebody could get the idea that it gets easier over time, is beyond me ...


----------



## perpend

manfy said:


> Hmm, strange language that German, innit?  How somebody could get the idea that it gets easier over time, is beyond me ...



 You may mean that studying it over the long run brings you back to the starting point?


----------



## elroy

manfy said:


> falls du bist, der du meiner Meinung nach bist. (Hier passt auch "falls du bist, *wer* du meiner Meinung nach bist.")


 Wait, hold the phone, "meiner Meinung nach"!  That takes care of it, doesn't it?  It avoids the ugly "ich glaube" while expressing the same meaning.

As far as "falls du bist, der/wer...": This structure sounds totally fine to me with "was," as in "Du bist, was ich Genie nennen würde," and I can see how that can be extended to "wer": "Du bist, wer das Geschenk gekauft hat."  It sounds really strange to me with "der," though, I think because "der" clauses aren't usually noun clauses.

(1) _Ich werde verrückt, falls du der bist, der du meiner Meinung nach bist._
(2) _Ich werde verrückt, falls du bist, wer du meiner Meinung nach bist._
(3) _Ich werde verrückt, falls du bist, der du meiner Meinung nach bist. 
_
(1) sounds totally fine to me; (2) is growing on me; (3) still sounds weird to me.

What do other native speakers think?


----------



## perpend

elroy said:


> What do other native speakers think?



Those are famous last words, to be sure. 

Ich empfinde überhaupt keinen Hauch von "Meinung" im OP.

"vorstellen" von Frieder ist in der Hinsicht gut.


----------



## elroy

_*I think* you're Queen Latifah.  Are you who* I think* you are?
Du bist *meiner Meinung nach* Queen Latifah. Bist du, wer du *meiner Meinung nach* bist?
_
Oder?


----------



## perpend

Hmmm ...
Ich denke, dass du QL bist. Bist du die, die ich mir vorstelle / die ich für wahr halte?

You're changing the context there a 'lil, elroy.


----------



## perpend

elroy said:


> _Bist du, wer du *meiner Meinung nach* bist?_



Just my opinion, but that sounds off to me in German.


----------



## bearded

djweaverbeaver said:


> *...if you were who I think you are* doesn't make because you can't mix up the tenses. It either has to be all in the present, as in the OP, or all in the past *...if you were who I thought you were*.


I am not a native English-speaker, but I cannot agree on that objection.  In my opinion, in the expression ''if you were who I think you are'' the 'were' is not a past tense, but a subjunctive hypothetic mood (irrealis/unreal) referring to the present - and corresponding to German _wenn du wärest._
If you were here (now), I would embrace you.  But you are not here...
If you were the one I think, I would be shocked:  same structure.


----------



## perpend

bearded man said:


> If you were here (now), I would embrace you.  But you are not here...
> If you were the one I think, I would be shocked:  same structure.



That's not the same as in the OP, since there is an added tense in the mix (in the OP). Thus DJ's thread in English Only.


----------



## bearded

perpend said:


> there is an added tense in the mix (in the OP


Would then ''If you were the one I think you are, I'd be shocked''  sound incorrect?
(See Dan's #10:  a native might have made the same suggestion).

I fully agree with velisarius in the other thread, for what it's worth.


----------



## perpend

GregorMcGinnis said:


> How do you say "I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are" and "Are you who I think you are?" in German?



Dear Gregor, Let us know, please, what your disposition is, at this point. Many kind regards, perpend

EDIT: Shall you have not received a proper welcome to the forum: Welcome!


----------



## GregorMcGinnis

perpend said:


> Dear Gregor, Let us know, please, what your disposition is, at this point. Many kind regards, perpend
> 
> EDIT: Shall you have not received a proper welcome to the forum: Welcome!




Thanks for all the answers. What I meant with that sentence was that it would be a very big surprise to me, if the person that is right now in front of me was that old friend of mine I am thinking about.
I hope it explains.


----------



## cuore romano

_Ich wäre wirklich sehr überrascht, wenn du tatsächlich der wärest, für den ich dich halte._

Aber wenn man wirklich völlig überrascht vor einem alten Freund steht, dann spricht man eher so:

_"Jetzt sag nicht, du bist der, an den ich grad denke!"_


----------



## djweaverbeaver

Top of the morning to all!

So I've slept on it and come to the conclusion that "*I'd be very shocked if you are who I think you are*" is indeed wrong as is.

It occurred to me that it doesn't really make sense to have *would *here if we're keeping the rest of the sentence. The sentence would have to read "_*I am shocked if you are who I think you are*_".

@manfy is right in *his post here* to say that we assume parenthetical statements in English because the OP is definitely a statement that can be heard in spoken (at least American) English!

Be sure to get your beauty rest! It works wonders!  Anyway, back to the German!


----------



## JClaudeK

Frieder said:


> "Are you who I think you are?" => Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?





manfy said:


> The second version is not possible with 'who'.
> "Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?" is more like "Are you the type of person (that) I think you are?"


_Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache? _ist zwar  frei übersetzt, aber für mich absolut nicht abwegig.


----------



## manfy

JClaudeK said:


> _Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache? _ist zwar  frei übersetzt, aber für mich absolut nicht abwegig.


Stimmt eigentlich. Wenn der Kontext passt, könnte man dies im Englischen auch als "Are you *who* I think you are?" ausdrücken (also figurative Anwendung von 'who'), aber ohne jeglichen Kontext käme mir umgekehrt diese deutsche Bedeutung nie in den Sinn.


----------



## perpend

GregorMcGinnis said:


> Thanks for all the answers. What I meant with that sentence was that it would be a very big surprise to me, if the person that is right now in front of me was that old friend of mine I am thinking about.
> I hope it explains.



Thanks. In that case, I find your sentence in the OP grammatical and fine. It's not wrong.


----------



## JClaudeK

GregorMcGinnis said:


> What I meant with that sentence was that it would be a very big surprise to me, if the person that is right now in front of me was that old friend of mine I am thinking about.


In that case, "Entsprichst du dem Bild, das ich mir von dir mache?" does'nt work, of course.

But
Es würde mich wirklich erschüttern, wenn du der bist, den ich im Sinn(e) habe.


----------



## Dan2

GregorMcGinnis said:


> *What I meant with that sentence was* that it would be a very big surprise to me, if the person that is right now in front of me was that old friend of mine *I am thinking about*.


Note: "I am thinking about" the old friend, not "I believe the person* is* the old friend".


perpend said:


> In that case, I find your sentence in the OP grammatical and fine. It's not wrong.


Yes, the OP sentence is grammatical but it does not, in my opinion, express what Gregor here says he meant to express.  With this revised meaning, I have no problem with his being shocked if ...".


JClaudeK said:


> Es würde mich wirklich erschüttern, wenn du der bist, den ich im Sinn(e) habe.


That seems to me to accurately capture the meaning of the revised sentence.


----------

