# Ihrem Antrag zugestimmt



## merquiades

Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zu gestimmt?

Was your application for an extension approved yet?


Hello everyone.  The phrase was taken out of a method for learning German, so no clear context. I should like to know why Ihrem Antrag (your application) is in the Dative Case when it is supposedly the subject of the sentence.  I guess I would have thought Ihr Antrag to be more natural?

Vielen Dank und Frohe Weihnachten!


----------



## Frank78

That's one special case of German grammar.

First, you might have noticed that the sentence is in passive voice (wurde zugestimmt).

Second, a dative object stays in the dative case, not matter if it's active or passive voice.

"Ich stimme *ihrem Antrag* zu.
"*Ihrem Antrag* wurde (durch mich) zugestimmt."


----------



## Perseas

merquiades said:


> I should like to know why Ihrem Antrag (your application) is in the Dative Case when it is supposedly the subject of the sentence.


No, "Antrag" is not the subject of the passive sentence.

Active: Ihrem Antrag stimmte man auf Verlägerung zu. (see also #6)
Passive: Ihrem Antrag wurde auf Verlägerung zugestimmt. (see also #6)

cross-posted with Frank78


*Edit*:
It's like in English, where in place of "to your application" you have to imagine "Ihrem Antrag":
They give consent to your application.
To your aplication is given consent.


----------



## berndf

merquiades said:


> I should like to know why Ihrem Antrag (your application) is in the Dative Case when it is supposedly the subject of the sentence.


This is, as Frank said, a peculiarity of German grammar: Intransitive or intransitively used verbs can be used in passive voice with a formally and semantically void subject (because there is no patient). To preserve V2 word order, some other sentence element moves into first position, in this case, the dative (indirect) object. If none is available, a semantically empty dummy subject _es_ is inserted (_Hier wird gesungen - Es wird gesungen_).


----------



## Hutschi

Please note also, that the _sequence_ is other than in English. It is not SPO here (subject predicate object)
In a simple Main clause, the finite Verb is at the Second Position.
Subjects and objects can be at the first place.

In case of passive, a grammatical subject is not required. 

The German passive object _Ihrem Antrag_ is at the first position. 
Another form would be _Ihr Antrag werde angenommen._ It is also passive but has a subject. This depends on the verb,
It is literally like Your application was approved. In this case it is a transitive verb. See also #2 ... 4.


----------



## Demiurg

Perseas said:


> Active: Ihrem Antrag stimmte man auf Verlägerung zu.
> Passive: Ihrem Antrag wurde auf Verlägerung zugestimmt.


Just a side note: "Antrag auf Verlängerung" (short "Verlängerungsantrag") belongs together:

Active: Ihrem Antrag auf Verlägerung stimmte man zu.
Passive: Ihrem Antrag auf Verlägerung wurde zugestimmt.


----------



## Perseas

Demiurg said:


> Just a side note: "Antrag auf Verlängerung" (short "Verlängerungsantrag") belongs together


Thanks, Demiurg. You're right, of course: "Antrag auf Verlängerung". Das war ein Flüchtigkeitsfehler.  Sorry!
But you agree that my point that the dative case is preserved in both constructions was correct.


----------



## merquiades

Thanks to all of you.  Sentences without subjects are new to me.  I guess I can feel the meaning, which is essential, but the sentence seems incomplete

Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zu gestimmt?
Was approving to your application for an extension yet?
The verb is kind of subject and we don't know by whom?

Hier wird gesungen.  Here was sung.  Singing what and by whom?

It allows maximum ambiguity.


----------



## Frank78

merquiades said:


> Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zu gestimmt?
> Was approving to your application for an extension yet?
> The verb is kind of subject and we don't know by whom?
> 
> Hier wird gesungen.  Here was sung.  Singing what and by whom?
> 
> It allows maximum ambiguity.



That is the very essence of a passive sentence. We don't know or it is uninteresting who does it.

The core difference between English and German is that a dative object in an active sentence cannot become a nominative subject in a passive sentence,

Peter gave *him* a book = Peter gab *ihm* ein Buch.
*He* was given a book = *Ihm* wurde ein Buch gegeben. - In either case "he"/"ihm" is still the recipient of the book. There's no ambiguity in the German sentence.


----------



## berndf

merquiades said:


> Hier wird gesungen. Here was sung. Singing what and by whom?
> 
> *It allows maximum ambiguity*.


This is precisely the purpose of the construct.


----------



## merquiades

Frank78 said:


> Peter gave *him* a book = Peter gab *ihm* ein Buch.
> *He* was given a book = *Ihm* wurde ein Buch gegeben. - In either case "he"/"ihm" is still the recipient of the book. There's no ambiguity in the German sentence.


Ok. That example is quite clear. German dative equals a subject in English. It helps to better understand "Wurde ihrem Antrag... zugestimmt" I guess it's just a mechanical issue. Mental note to use dative in passive structures.


----------



## Perseas

Just a thought of mine:


Frank78 said:


> Peter gave *him* a book = Peter gab *ihm* ein Buch.
> *He* was given a book = *Ihm* wurde ein Buch gegeben.


Peter gave *him* a book = Peter gab *ihm* ein Buch. (Active)
A book was given *to him* = *Ihm* wurde ein Buch gegeben. (Passive 1)
*He* was given a book = *Er ... ??? *(Passive 2)



Frank78 said:


> The core difference between English and German is that a dative object in an active sentence cannot become a nominative subject in a passive sentence


If this is what you and berndf have called a peculiarity, at least in my eyes is a normality, since in my language the construction "I was given a book" doesn't exist either.


----------



## berndf

merquiades said:


> I guess it's just a mechanical issue. Mental note to use dative in passive structures.


Better: Remember that indirect objects connot become the subject of the passive voice. Remember that the German subject is identified by case and *not* by position:
_Ihm *wurden* zwei Bücher gegeben.
Zwei Bücher *wurden* ihm gegeben_.​As you can see from the plural verb form, zwei Bücher is the subject of both sentences. The changed word ordet does not alter the syntactic structure of the the sentence. In English, this is fundamentally different:
_He *was* given two books.
Two books *were* given to him._​


----------



## berndf

Perseas said:


> If this is what you and berndf have called a peculiarity, at least in my eyes is a normality, since in my language the construction "I was given a book" doesn't exist either.


I said the _subjectless passive_ was a German peculiarity. The sentence _Ihm wurde ein Buch gegeben_ has a subject (_ein Buch_). There is nothing peculiar about it.


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> I said the _subjectless passive_ was a German peculiarity. The sentence _Ihm wurde ein Buch gegeben_ has a subject (_ein Buch_). There is nothing peculiar about it.


OK, I see now. You've referred to the lack of the subject in this passive structure:_ Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zugestimmt?_
It seems I've become so familiar with this German syntax, that I didn't even notice it as a peculiarity. (Instead I was focused on an English (probably) peculiarity: _I was given a book_)...


----------



## merquiades

Wurde (Zeit) Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung (von ihnen) schon zugestimmt?



Would the unstated subject of this passive sentence be (zeit/ time)?


----------



## berndf

The sentence
_Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zugestimmt?_​is grammatical and idiomatic.

It would make no sense to add _von ihnen_. You use the construction precisely to avoid specifying an agent.

The conjugation used for undefined an subject is 3rd singular. There are a handful of subjectless verbs also in English where you use a dummy placeholder and the verb is in 3rd singular. E.g. _It rains_. There is nothing _it_ stands for. It is purely formal. In German, these construction are much more regular and there are even cases where you need the formal _es_ only if there is nothing that could fill the first position.


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> It would make no sense to add _von ihnen_. You use the construction precisely to avoid specifying an agent.


I agree, but (in my opinion) it wouldn't be out of place to think of an agent, eg. "von ihnen" or "von einer Behörde".

On the contrary, it would be simply wrong to imply "Zeit" or anything else as a subject in the passive sentence.


----------



## berndf

Perseas said:


> I agree, but (in my opinion) it wouldn't be out of place to think of an agent, eg. "von ihnen" or "von einer Behörde".
> 
> On the contrary, it would be simply wrong to imply "Zeit" or anything else as a subject in the passive sentence.


I agree.


----------



## bearded

merquiades said:


> German dative equals a subject in English..... Mental note to use dative in passive structures.


Not always.  You only have dative here because the verb _zustimmen _governs the dative case. With another verb, e.g. _gedenken _(= to think of, to remember), which usually governs the genitive case, you would have genitive: _Dieses Menschen wurde niemals gedacht _(there was never a remembrance of this person). As a question: _Wurde dieses Menschen jemals/schon gedacht?_


----------



## Schlabberlatz

bearded said:


> Not always.  You only have dative here because the verb _zustimmen _governs the dative case. With another verb, e.g. _gedenken _(= to think of, to remember), which usually governs the genitive case, you would have genitive: _Dieses Menschen wurde niemals gedacht _(there was never a remembrance of this person). As a question: _Wurde dieses Menschen jemals/schon gedacht?_


Right. One could also say:
Wurde Ihr Antrag auf Verlängerung schon bewilligt? (Accusative.)


Perseas said:


> *He* was given a book = *Er ... ???*


Er bekam ein Buch. (Just kidding  )


Perseas said:


> it wouldn't be out of place to think of an agent, eg. "von ihnen" or "von einer Behörde".


Yes, but then one would probably prefer an active sentence.
Hat die Behörde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zugestimmt?
More likely than:
Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung von der Behörde schon zugestimmt?


----------



## bearded

Schlabberlatz said:


> One could also say:
> Wurde Ihr Antrag auf Verlängerung schon bewilligt? (Accusative)



If the word 'accusative' refers to 'Verlängerung', ok, but 'Antrag' is the subject (nominative) in this passive example of yours. Or am I misunderstanding something?


----------



## Schlabberlatz

bearded said:


> If the word 'accusative' refers to 'Verlängerung', ok, but 'Antrag' is the subject (nominative) in this passive example of yours. Or am I misunderstanding something?


Oh, it seems I didn't think about it enough. I thought it was accusative. "bewilligen" requires accusative, "zustimmen" requires dative, and the sentences look similar


merquiades said:


> Wurde Ihrem Antrag auf Verlängerung schon zu gestimmt?





Schlabberlatz said:


> Wurde Ihr Antrag auf Verlängerung schon bewilligt?


But it's nominative here. "Wer wurde bewilligt", not "Wen wurde bewilligt"


----------



## bearded

Hallo Schlabberlatz
Dein Versehen entstand vermutlich dadurch, dass die vorherigen Sätze (dem Antrag zugestimmt/des Menschen gedacht) passiv _aber unpersönlich _waren, während Du einen Beispielsatz gewählt hast, welcher zwar passiv ist, aber ein Subjekt besitzt (eben 'Ihr Antrag'). Du hast wahrscheinlich diesen Unterschied übersehen (mir passieren ähnliche und noch schlimmere Dinge hundertmal am Tag).


----------



## Schlabberlatz

bearded said:


> Du hast wahrscheinlich diesen Unterschied übersehen


Ja, wie schon gesagt, ich habe nicht ausreichend darüber nachgedacht


----------

