# Genitive endings: "-es" vs. "-s"



## Tahanta

Hallo zusammen,

some of the nouns in my German dictionary have *-(e)s* as the genitive ending.
Does that mean that both *-es* and *-s* are correct genitive endings for that noun?
Or do we use *-es* in some situations, and *-s* in some other situations?

For example, my dictionary says *Kalk, -(e)s*. 
Are then both "des Kalkes" and "des Kalks" correct? 
Google has 27800 matches for "des Kalkes" and 32200 matches for "des Kalks". When do we use "des Kalkes" and when "des Kalks"? Or are they completely interchangeable?

Similarly, *Hund, -(e)s*. Do we use "des Hunds" in some situations, and "des Hundes" in some other situations? If so, how to know which form to use?
Or are they completely equivalent?

Vielen Dank!


----------



## Kumpel

I'm no native, but as far as I'm aware, they're interchangeable.
I'm sure it depends on personal preference, and whichever is easier to say.
I can't think of an example, but imagine a word with a long consonant cluster at the end; then add yet another consonant -s. It becomes quite difficult to say; adding a vowel and a another syllable would resolve this, i.e. -es.

Wait for a native, though, of course.

Lloyd

Oh, and of your examples, I prefer _des Hund*es*_.


----------



## berndf

Spot on, Kumpel.


----------



## sokol

They're both equivalent grammatically, however stylistically they might not be - depending on context, and noun, and region, and possibly even idioms.

Personally I would prefer "des Hundes" because genitive is not used in colloquial speech and dialects in Austria at all, thus the more formal version "-es" sounds "more natural" to me.
However, for all I know, speakers who still use genitive in colloquial speech might prefer "des Hunds".

In other cases the "-es" genitive would sound weird: "des Dativs" is correct idiomatically, but "des Datives" sounds very archaic - or at least to me; googling, I just discovered that there are many more hits for "Datives" than for "Dativs" (however, only a few for the exact match of "des Datives").

I'm not sure if some rules of thumb could be given when to use one or the other - personally I think that that's not possible but then native speakers usually aren't confronted with such rules of thumb which are so useful for learners, but useless for native speakers (except of course when they're teachers teaching non-natives ).


EDIT: This post was written _*before*_ I saw berndf's confirmation of what Kumpel wrote. That's interesting for me too, as I wasn't sure at all whether Kumpel's observation indeed is spot on. But one needs to take into account here too that _*my*_ native German (that is, Austrian German) knows genitive only in standard language; so my intuition about genitive might actually not be very representative.


----------



## Kumpel

I don't now if this helps much, but I was trying to come up with a good  'phrase' a few weeks back (there's a thread about it on here) and I  ended up with this...
_
Schwulst um des Schwulstes willen_

There were two reason that I chose _Schwulst*es*_: 1) it  sounds a bit more _schwulstig_, which is the feel I was going  for, and 2) that consonant cluster at the end -lst - i.e. des Schwu*lsts*  would be quite hard to pronounce.

Lloyd


----------



## sokol

Kumpel said:


> _
> Schwulst um des Schwulstes willen_
> 
> There were two reason that I chose _Schwulst*es*_: 1) it  sounds a bit more _schwulstig_, which is the feel I was going  for, and 2) that consonant cluster at the end -lst - i.e. des Schwu*lsts*  would be quite hard to pronounce.
> 
> Lloyd


You're definitely right about that one - I think that all native speakers would find "Schwulsts" difficult to pronounce, which is why "Schwulstes" definitely is preferable.
But as I said above, personally I am not so sure about how universal this rule is, me being one of those speakers who isn't using genitive excessively himself.


----------



## Hutschi

I also would prefer "Schwulstes", but "Schwulsts" is not wrong.

In some cases it may depend on the rhythm structure what I use, especially in poetry.

Note also the stress structure:

"des *Sin*nes, des *Sinns*"
but usually only "des *Wahn*sinns" 
("des Wahnsinnes" - I would suppose it is a special sense - but it isn't - this blocks the form "des Wahnsinnes" usually, except in poetic language or if you really mean the sense rather than the state of being crazy)

The usage of the genitive form is quite usual here.


----------



## Lykurg

I agree on all these points. One might add that -es is also often regarded as poetic style. When you insert the e, you gain an additional unstressed syllable - so you can fill the metrum or improve the flow.


----------



## Tahanta

Thank you all for the replies!



sokol said:


> I'm not sure if some rules of thumb could be given when to use one or the other - personally I think that that's not possible but then native speakers usually aren't confronted with such rules of thumb which are so useful for learners, but useless for native speakers



Oh!, a rule of thumb is exactly what I was looking for!  

After Kumpel's and sokol's replies, I've been browsing through my grammar and found the following:



> Nowadays the *-es* genitive ending is usually used only in monosyllabic nouns where pronunciation might otherwise prove difficult (des Jahres), but it must be used in nouns or syllables ending in -s, -sch, -ß/-ss, -st (der Schwulst ), -z


However, on some sites I have found the following "general rule":


> genitive noun endings:
> Masculine and neuter: take -es (one syllable nouns) or -s (two or more syllables)


That would mean:
- to use -es in monosyllabic nouns (des Jahres, des Brotes, des Bettes), and
- to use -s in longer nouns (des Appetits, des Gewinns).
^All of the above nouns have -(e)s as the genitive ending in my dictionary.

So, what do you native German (or Austrian German ) speakers say:
would it be okay to follow these guidelines on what to choose, if *both* -es and -s are correct:


if a noun is monosyllabic, use *-es*
if a noun is polysyllabic, use *-s* except  when that noun ends in -s, -sch, -ß/-ss, -st or -z, in which case use *-es*?

Many thanks!


----------



## sokol

Tahanta, those rules of thumb you've found indeed sound pretty good  - they might not fit for all contexts (which after all is the problem about rules of thumb, that they're *only* rules of thumb ), but they're definitely a basis where you can build on.


----------



## Kumpel

Tahanta said:


> - to use -es in monosyllabic nouns (des Jahres, des Brotes, des Bettes)



I can't speak as a native, but I would comfortably say _des Brots_.
_Jahr_ is an odd one, I think. _Des Jahrs _feels fine, but I find myself not pronouncing the R; I don't know if that's just because I'm a foreigner or not... _Des Jahres_, I can pronounce the R, but it seems like a pointlessly-added syllable because _Jahrs_ is fine.

This sounds repetitive, but natives may disagree.

Lloyd


----------



## markusd

sokol said:


> But one needs to take into account here too that _*my*_ native German (that is, Austrian German) knows genitive only in standard language; so my intuition about genitive might actually not be very representative.



But they are perfectly representative for Autstrian German, I can confirm! 

Markus


----------



## sokol

No, Lloyd, I wouldn't disagree with you here, not at all. "Des Brots" sounds better than "Brotes", and "des Jahres" better than "des Jahrs".

In this case however neither "-ts" of the first one and "-ahrs" of the second one pose any problems to native speakers, phonetically (as the latter anyway is pronounced /ja:s/): so the reason is not phonetics or phonology. It's just one of the cases where the rule of thumb does not apply, for no "logical" reason whatsoever. 



markusd said:


> But they are perfectly representative for Autstrian German, I can confirm!
> 
> Markus


Yes certainly, genitive _*is*_ used in Austria, no disagreement here - but as you know it is not a feature of colloquial speech or dialects; it's only used in standard language (and slightly making inroads into colloquial speech which however aren't really 'classical' genitives, which however would be off-topic here: if you want to discuss this then let's please open a new thread about that ).

The point I was trying to make here was: as Austrians, with their different native proficiency in genitive (non-use in colloquial speech), differ in use from Germans north of a line somewhere near the "Weisswurst-Äquator" they might also differ in what they think is "proper" and "good" use of genitive endings.


----------



## markusd

What about "des Bettes" then? Personally, I would prefer "des Betts" which goes against the rule of thumb above... 
Markus


----------



## sokol

markusd said:


> What about "des Bettes" then? Personally, I would prefer "des Betts" which goes against the rule of thumb above...
> Markus


I'm not sure myself, "des Bett(e)s" surely is one of the cases where genitive is only rarely used. Personally I think I would use "Bettes", but to me "Betts" would not look "strange" or "exceptional".


----------



## markusd

sokol said:


> Yes certainly, genitive _*is*_ used in Austria, no disagreement here


There is more agreement than you might think - 
you might have overlooked the entry for my native language... 
Markus


----------



## Kumpel

sokol said:


> the latter anyway is pronounced /ja:s/



Right, thanks. So it's not just my non-native inability, then? 
What about _Jahres_, then? /ja:R*s/?
That, I can pronounce, even though you say _Jahrs_ is the _haeufiger_.

(* is schwa, I can't be bothered pasting it from anywhere)



Lloyd


----------



## berndf

sokol said:


> I'm not sure myself, "des Bett(e)s" surely is one of the cases where genitive is only rarely used. Personally I think I would use "Bettes", but to me "Betts" would not look "strange" or "exceptional".


Where I come from it is not rare at all. An I normally say "Betts"; "Bettes" sounds correct and superiour but archaic to me and I wouldn't use it in a colloquial context. On the other side, I would never ever say *"Grats" or *"Hunds" but always "Grates" and "Hundes" but then again I normally say "Huts" and "Bretts". I find it difficult to find a strict rule.



markusd said:


> What about "des Bettes" then? Personally, I would prefer "des Betts" which goes against the rule of thumb above...
> Markus


That's why it is called rule of thumb. It isn't strict.


----------



## berndf

Kumpel said:


> What about _Jahres_, then? /ja:R*s/?


That's fine. It is in "Jahrs" where the "r" is virtually never pronounced.


----------



## sokol

markusd said:


> There is more agreement than you might think -
> you might have overlooked the entry for my native language...
> Markus


Oh - I misunderstood: obviously you meant that my statements _*about*_ genitive in _Austrian_ German are representative; at first I thought you wanted to contradict me above, which obviously is not the case: sorry for that. 

So we both agree after all on the use of genitive in Austria.


----------



## Hutschi

berndf said:


> That's fine. It is in "Jahrs" where the "r" is  virtually never pronounced.





> Originally Posted by *sokol*
> 
> 
> the latter anyway is pronounced /ja:s/


This depends on region. I never say /ja:s/ for "des Jahrs" but for "des Jas" (genitive of "Ja").
I definitely pronounce them differently. They are definitely not rhyming here. But I know, in Nena's songs they are rhyming. It is a question of region.

But I do not know how to write the "r" I use in IPA. Is is between a schwa and a rolled "r", at least if I do not roll the "r" I diphthonguize the "a" - and it is tensed (gespannt) then.
I would prefer to include the "e" here. This is because of the following rule of thumb:

I have following simple rule of thumb:
Use "s" by default. (If it is easy to speak, omit the "e"). If you feel any difficulty and if you find a consonant cluster (except ending with "n"), then include it.

Example:
des Sommers - no difficulty, no consonant cluster. (So it does not matter that "des Sommeres" is not possible.
des Steigs - no difficulty, no consonant cluster
des Rehs - it is in the middle. If you see difficulties say "Des Rehes".
Murx - consonant cluster and difficult to speak without "e" -> des Murxes.

Des Hinterns - easy to speak /so consonant cluster does not play a role. (Behind "n" is no "e" but we already have the word.)


----------



## brian

*Moderator note: Thread with same topic merged.

*Hi everyone,

I'm interested in how the German genitive suffix /s/ attaches to stems already ending in a sibilant, especially [ʃ], since [s] and [ʃ] are not completely identical.

I've seen in dictionaries (e.g. here) that say that a word like _Tisch_ can optionally epenthesize a vowel, e.g. _Tisch*e*s_ [-ʃ*ə*s], or not, _Tisch*s*_ [-ʃs]. I asked my phonology professor, a native German speaker, about this, and he said that in his dialect he would always say _Tisch*s*_, and that _Tisch*e*s_ sounds archaic.

So here are my questions. Does [-ʃ*ə*s] sound archaic to you? Would you always say [-ʃs]? Does it depend on the word?

As usual, I'm talking here about what sounds natural to you in your everyday native German, and not what you would write.

Thanks!

Brian


----------



## brian

Actually, I just realized that the schwa is most likely _not_ epenthesis, but simply an older form altogether, since it shows up even in words like _Tag*(e)*s_, where there would be no phonological reason to epenthesize a vowel between [g] and [s], as there would between, say, [ʃ] and [s].

In any case, I'd still be interested to know if there are German speakers of any dialects who _always_ have [-ʃ*ə*s], and never [-ʃs], because in that case I believe it would indeed be epenthesis, just like the schwa in [-s*ə*s], e.g. _Haus*es*_ instead of *_Haus_ or _*Haus*s*_.


----------



## Gernot Back

brian said:


> since  and [ʃ] are not completely  identical.


There is no rule for the -(e)s-genitive with or  without the vowel after  [ʃ] , but there is one for its use after :
http://www.canoo.net/services/Onlin.../Texte/s-und-es-Gen.html#Anchor-Genitiv-11481


brian said:


> (...)he said that in his dialect he would always say _Tisch*s*_, and that _Tisch*e*s_ sounds archaic.
> 
> So here are my questions. Does [-ʃ*ə*s] sound archaic to you? Would you always say [-ʃs]? Does it depend on the word?


No, it doesn't sound archaic at all.
And yes it does depend on the word: I would always write the <e> in the genitive ending of a one syllable word ending in  [ʃ], while I would usually avoid it in written German in two or more syllable or compund words like _Mischmasch _(des _Mischmasch*s*_) and Nachtisch (_des Nachtisch*s*_). I would probably not pronounce the <e> even in a one-syllable word  ending in  [ʃ] like _Tisch _and simply say "_des Tisches_" when simply talking. Seeing the word with the <e> in a text, however, might seduce me to pronounce it when reading it out loud.


----------



## Kuestenwache

There is also the phenomenon that the gramatically correct form "des Tisch(e)s" is being replaced by da Dative contrustruction. I.e. in many dialects you would hear "Die Beine vom Tisch" instead of "Die Beine des Tisch(e)s", thus circumventing the problem in the first place.
This applies to my dialect for example. When speaking "normally" or in script I would use "die Beine des Tisches" with <e> in dialect however it would be "Die Bää vumm Disch" (Palatinate).


----------



## Demiurg

Some dialects prefer a dative + possessive pronoun construction: _dem Tisch seine Beine_.


----------



## Gernot Back

Demiurg said:


> Some dialects prefer a dative + possessive pronoun construction: _dem Tisch seine Beine_.


 Du moanst: _dem Tisch sei Füaß!_


----------



## Hutschi

Tahanta wrote that she found in a grammar:





> Nowadays the *-es* genitive ending is usually used only in  monosyllabic nouns where pronunciation might otherwise prove difficult  (des Jahres), but it must be used in nouns or syllables ending in -s,  -sch, -ß/-ss, -st (der Schwulst), -z


While the "es" and "s" endings build usually the genitive, in some exceptions also other forms exist.

So the statement is not true, for example, for "Mensch".

der Mensch, des Menschen ...

In this case the _es_ genitive must not be used but the _en _genitive.


----------



## berndf

brian said:


> Actually, I just realized that the schwa is most likely _not_ epenthesis, but simply an older form altogether...


Exactly. The Proto-Germanic singular genitive suffix is _-as_ or _-is_. The full vowels were later reduced to Schwa (as e.g. in the infinitive ending _-an > -en_) and sometimes completely elided. What do you think the apostrophe in the English genitive ending _-'s_ stands for?


----------



## brian

Thanks.

Basically what I'm interested in is something called _antigemination_, i.e. the avoidance of (certain) geminates, like [ss]. So for German, we could say that the genitive suffix is generally /s/, with _optional_ schwa for most words ending in a consonant, but when attaching to a stem already ending in [s], we have _obligatory_ schwa epenthesis to avoid [ss].

It's basically the same in English (minus the schwa optionality) for possessivization as well as pluralization and 3rd person singular verb inflection, e.g. _boss > boss*'s*/boss*es*_ [-səs], except that in English we epenthesize to avoid [ʃs] as well, e.g. _bush > bush*'s*/bush*es*_ [-ʃəs], _itch > itch*'s*/itch*es*_ [-tʃəs].

So I was mainly curious to see what native German intuitions are about [(t)ʃ] + /s/ in German, and whether [(t)ʃs] or [(t)ʃəs] sounds better.

There are many problems, though. (1) I want to have your native intuitions, i.e. what you find natural in everyday language, but the genitive is practically dead for many dialects already, so the "intuitions" are often what you learn in school or read in poetry/formal writing. (2) It's not as clear-cut as in English, because German has this schwa optionality, so it's important to figure out whether a word ending in [-ʃəs] sounds better because you're avoiding [ʃs], or rather because it's simply one of those words that sounds better with no schwa.


----------



## berndf

brian said:


> So for German, we could say that the genitive suffix is generally /s/, with _optional_ schwa for most words ending in a consonant, but when attaching to a stem already ending in [s], we have _obligatory_ schwa epenthesis to avoid [ss].


My intuition is the other way round: The normal genitive singular ending is _-es_ with optional elision of the Schwa (->_flüchtiges "e"_ as e.g. here). A final _-s_ in the stem prevents the elision (_des Hauses_).



brian said:


> So I was mainly curious to see what native German intuitions are about [(t)ʃ] + /s/ in German, and whether [(t)ʃs] or [(t)ʃəs] sounds better.


It is slightly easier to pronounce with the Schwa but I don't think it matters if the preceding consonant is /ʃ/ or any other consonant except /s/.


----------



## brian

berndf said:


> My intuition is the other way round: The normal genitive singular ending is _-es_ with optional elision of the Schwa (->_flüchtiges "e"_ as e.g. here). A final _-s_ in the stem prevents the elision (_des Hauses_).



Yes, that's probably a better way of thinking about it, actually.



berndf said:


> It is slightly easier to pronounce with the Schwa but I don't think it matters if the preceding consonant is /ʃ/ or any other consonant except /s/.



Okay, that's what I expected. It explains why in my experience many Germans are surprised to find out that, when speaking English, they're supposed to pronounce something like _George Bush*'s* father_ with [-ʃəz] instead of [-ʃs].


----------



## berndf

brian said:


> Okay, that's what I expected. It explains why in my experience many Germans are surprised to find out that, when speaking English, they're supposed to pronounce something like _George Bush*'s* father_ with [-ʃəz] instead of [-ʃs].


Yes indeed. It this sounds strange to me.


----------



## Dan2

brian said:


> It explains why in my experience many Germans are surprised to find out that, when speaking English, they're supposed to pronounce something like _George Bush*'s* father_ with [-ʃəz] instead of [-ʃs].


It's occurred to me that German can actually be of assistance in determining the exact form of the _English _rule for presence vs absence of the schwa.

For example, in referring to German text, I find it much more natural to say "There are two [buxs] (two occurrences of the word "Buch") in that sentence" than [buxəz].  OTOH, I think I prefer, for "two occurrences of "ich", "two [içəz]".  (I realize these sentences are a bit unnatural, but they're conceivable, for ex., among English-speaking students in a German class.)


----------



## Roy776

Well, to me, the genetive case is a very important part of my daily speech as a native speaker. It's in no way dead, I use it on a regular basis, and think that I know quite well how to use which ending.

For me, *-es* almost always sounds more formal. Not archaic, just more formal. But in a normal, colloquial conversation with family members, aquaintances and such, I'd use *-s* more often than not. For example, in a business letter, I would write like this (just an example made up by me):

"Der Preis dieses Haus*es* deckt sich mit dem Preis eures kleinen Grundstück*es*."

Makes no sense, I know, it's just to show that in a formal letter, I'd go for *-es*. There are some cases in which *-es* is just not possible, as it doesn't sound natural, yet I would try to avoid *-s* wherever possible.

As said, in a colloquial conversation, it's the complete opposite. I rarely use *-es*, unless it is necessary by the words pronunciation.


----------

