0

In some sites and book I have read that werden takes objects in nominative... then I met this sentence:

Der Prozess wird mehr durch die Rodung eines vorhandenen Waldbestandes ausgelöst,...

It seems to me that the werden takes an accusative object in the above. Is the rule wrong in general? If so, could a reference be given? Thanks.

tryst with freedom
  • 2,555
  • 8
  • 35

3 Answers3

2

Der Prozess wird mehr durch die Rodung eines vorhandenen Waldbestandes ausgelöst,...

That piece durch die Rodung eines vorhandenen Waldbestandes isn't an accusative object. You can see that easily from the fact that it has a preposition in front.

It's a causal adverbial.

That werden in your example sentence is an auxiliary for passive voice as its complement is the Partizip II ausgelöst of the verb auslösen.

Janka
  • 60,148
  • 2
  • 63
  • 119
  • If something has a preposition in front, it can no longer be an object? – tryst with freedom Aug 10 '23 at 12:27
  • Don't all verbs need an object? How does this sentence even make sense then? – tryst with freedom Aug 10 '23 at 12:28
  • @SBrian "Das stimmt nicht". There is no object in this preceeding sentence. So no, not every sentence needs an object. That's not the case in English either ("That's right"). Nor actually, does every sentence needs a subject (at least in German, e.g. "Ihm geht es gut"). – planetmaker Aug 10 '23 at 13:25
  • 1
    If something has a preposition in front, it can no longer be an accusative, dative, genitive object. But only an adverbial or a prepositional object. E.g. Er wartet auf den Bus. features a prepositional object auf den Bus, not an accusative object den Bus. You can see this from building passive voice. Von ihm wird auf den Bus gewartet. If den Bus was an accusative object, It had to become the subject of the passive voice sentence instead of being left untouched. Also, the correct passive voice sentence has no subject as the active voice sentence had no accusative object. – Janka Aug 10 '23 at 18:38
  • @SBrian The key to understanding the sentence is to realize that (as the answer already states) the sentence uses passive voice, and that werden is an auxiliary verb so the rule that it takes a nominative complement (the term object is usually avoided here in German grammar terminology) doesn't apply. – RHa Aug 10 '23 at 20:42
1

No, it's not true that every verb needs an object, nor does German have any objects in nominative case:

  1. "werden" as a passive auxiliary (as in your example) doesn't take an object or subject at all, only full verbs do. The nominative in this clause, as in any other clause, comes from the fact that the predicate is finite, no matter which verb shows the finite inflection (the passive aux can also occur in an infinitive).

  2. "werden" as a copula verb takes a complement, but doesn't assign case to it. The complement is therefore not called a "grammatical object". The nominative case on the complement of "werden" is an instance of agreement with the nominative subject. If the first argument gets a different case, the complement changes accordingly:

  • Der Kongress darf kein Misserfolg werden. (2 x nominative)
  • Lassen wir den Kongress bitte keinen Misserfolg werden! (2 x accusative)

(The congress must not become a failure / Don't let the congress become a failure). Summarised from https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%A4dikativum#Der_Kasus_von_substantivischen_Pr%C3%A4dikativa

Alazon
  • 3,181
  • 1
  • 1
  • 11
1

I'm not going to add anything new, but just try to explain in terms understandable to mere mortals. First, the rule that werden takes a nominative object is an oversimplification at best. Some verbs in both German or English describe the subject as either a adjective, noun or some other phrase. Examples in English include: "Jane is smart." "Jane is becoming a teacher." "Stay there." In German, "sein", "werden" and "bleiben" can be such verbs, though they can have other meanings and uses. When it's a noun in German, the rule is that noun is in the nominative case. The most famous example is JFK's "Ich bin ein Berliner." Note that it's not "einen" or "einem", just "ein", so nominative case. (Technically, correct English uses the same rule, but very few people actually follow it. I once saw a character in a TV show ask "Are these they?" This is actually correct but the sentence was immediately ridiculed by the people he was talking to. The idiomatic form would be "Are these them?") But it doesn't have to be a noun at all, and the case rule would obviously not apply then. Actually, your sentence is not an example of this since "werden" is only being used to form the passive voice. In English with the active voice "Something triggers the process more by the clearing of an existing forest stand." This becomes the passive: "The process is triggered more by the clearing of an existing forest stand." As I said, "werden" can have other meanings and uses.

RDBury
  • 11,442
  • 1
  • 13
  • 42