Du hast (sogar) nicht mal dein Essen angerührt, wieso bist du satt?

Caioveloso

Senior Member
Brazilian portuguese
Moin,

"Du hast (sogar) nicht mal dein Essen ausgerührt, wieso bist du satt?"

Does it make sense to add "sogar" here? if so, how does it affect the meaning of the sentence? does the additional word make the sentence more or less formal?
 
  • Hutschi

    Senior Member
    "Du hast (sogar) nicht mal dein Essen angerührt, wieso bist du satt?"

    "Sogar" is mostly used with positive verbs:
    "Du hast sogar alles aufgegessen, wieso bist du (da) noch nicht satt?"

    Positive and negative, you can use "ja", "doch", and maybe others:

    "Du hast ja dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?/..., wie kannst du da satt sein?"
    "Ja" is spoken short, it is not "ja=yes".

    "Du hast doch dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?/..., wie kannst du da satt sein?"

    (I would rearrange it here and use "wie kannst du da satt sein?")
    ("Da" is also a particle, it emphasizes astonishment)


    The sentence is not formal, but if it were normal, particles as "doch", "sogar", "ja" etc. make it less formal. They are often used in dialogues and add emotions or emphasize parts.

    Edit: added more examples, improved structure.
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    small excurs:
    I want to give the default sequence:
    "Du hast dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?"
    "Nicht mal" basically negates the verb.

    In your case "Du hast nicht mal dein Essen angerührt, wieso bist du satt?"
    This is usually in contrast to some other parts or emphasizes some other parts, not mentioned here. It does not work good with "wieso bist du satt?"
    I give an example:
    Du hast gar nichts angerührt. Du hast (sogar) nicht mal dein Essen angerührt. (The second sentence emphasizes the first one). Here "sogar" works, because the second sentence emphasizes the first one.
     

    Caioveloso

    Senior Member
    Brazilian portuguese
    I think, Caioveloso can tell us if the version in #1 is correct, as διαφορετικός and I suppose.
    It's more like your version, but it's all hypothetical, I made this sentence up to check better ways of conveying its idea and also to learn how to use these "filler" particles you mentioned, which is not an easy task, but yeah, they do make sentences sound more natural, which is my focus. Danke vielmals!
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    No. “nicht mal” already means “not even.” You can’t add another “even.”
    Hi elroy,
    I just read it again. Could you explain it? I do not understand the identity not even - sogar. (Except that bot contradict each other.) "Sogar" is almost the contrary of "not even".

    Ich habe nicht mal eine Portion gegessen. vs. Ich habe sogar zwei Portionen gegessen.
     

    elroy

    Moderator: EHL, Arabic, Hebrew, German(-Spanish)
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    “nicht mal” = “not even”
    *“sogar nicht mal” = *“even not even”
     

    elroy

    Moderator: EHL, Arabic, Hebrew, German(-Spanish)
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    This way "even" is an antagonym (Januswort).
    It means itself and its contrary (approximately).
    How do you figure?

    My only point was that “even not even” doesn’t make sense.

    I think the confusion is that German uses “sogar” for “even,” but for “not even” it doesn’t use “nicht sogar” but “nicht (ein)mal.” I suspect @Caioveloso wasn’t aware of this German peculiarity and didn’t realize the “even” meaning was already conveyed through the use of “mal,” and that that’s why they wanted to add “sogar.”
     

    elroy

    Moderator: EHL, Arabic, Hebrew, German(-Spanish)
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    Spanish is like German and Italian: “hasta/incluso” vs. “ni siquiera.” But French is like English: “même” vs. “même pas.” I don’t know about Portuguese, @Caioveloso’s native language.
     
    Last edited:

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    My only point was that “even not even” doesn’t make sense.
    I see. I misunderstood.

    In German:
    "sogar nicht mal" can make sense if the context fits. This is not the case in the example in #1.

    "Du hast sogar nicht mal dein Essen angerührt, wieso bist du satt?"
    (This is usually semantically problematic, but can be correct. Du hast dein Essen nicht nur kritisiert, du hast es sogar nicht mal angerührt, ...")


    "Du hast nicht nur nichts gegessen, du hast das Essen nicht mal angesehen."
     

    JClaudeK

    Senior Member
    Français France, Deutsch (SW-Dtl.)

    διαφορετικός

    Senior Member
    Swiss German - Switzerland
    Du hast dein Essen nicht nur kritisiert, du hast es sogar nicht mal angerührt, ...
    Yes, it is justified to use "even" twice here ("sogar" + "nicht mal"), because they refer to different units.

    (But it would be easier to read as follows: "Du hast dein Essen nicht nur kritisiert, sondern du hast es (auch) nicht mal angerührt.")
     

    Caioveloso

    Senior Member
    Brazilian portuguese
    Spanish is like German and Italian: “hasta/incluso” vs. “ni siquiera.” But French is like English: “même” vs. “même pas.” I don’t know about Portuguese, @Caioveloso’s native language.
    In Portuguese we would say "nem sequer", which I guess, is similar to Italian "ni sequiera", but we also say "nem mesmo", "mesmo" resembles "sogar" a bit (they don't always mean the same though), which made me thinks the same structure could exist in German, but as you explained, it doesn't. Everything is clear now, it is better to say only "nicht einmal" in negative sentences.
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    you can`t use anfassen in this context, when referring to food, that is, as a synonym of "eat" Examples with this verb:
    Fass die Tür nicht an, sie ist schmutzig.
    Fass mich nicht an!
    Er kann den Hund ruhig anfassen.
    Hi anahiseri,

    nicht angefasst:
    I think you can use it because it is an idiom for "you did not eat it, not even touch it."

    This means, it is synonym in the negated form.

    At least in my region it is used and idiomatic and I use it myself.

    Beispiel:
    nicht mal angefasst - Englisch Übersetzung - Deutsch Beispiele | Reverso Context
    Du hast dein Essen nicht mal angefasst, deine Kleider sind noch nicht trocken und ich glaube, wir beide wissen, dass du sonst nirgends hinkannst.

    In positive form it is another thing.
    "Du hast dein Essen angefasst, jetzt musst du auch aufessen."
    Here "anfassen" does not have a direct connection to "eating".
     

    anahiseri

    Senior Member
    Spanish (Spain) and German (Germany)
    My explanation was not good. Both anrühren and anfassen can be translated by touch, but in the context of eating, nicht anrühren means not even eat a little bit, not even start eating, not even put your spoon in the soup . For me, anfassen is not idiomatic in this context.- But maybe it depends on the region
    I know it's off the topic but I think it's worthwhile mentioning.
     

    JClaudeK

    Senior Member
    Français France, Deutsch (SW-Dtl.)
    Both anrühren and anfassen can be translated by touch, but in the context of eating, nicht anrühren means not even eat a little bit
    :thumbsup:
    Ja, anrühren (im Zusammenhang mit Essen) wird im übertragenen Sinn gebraucht, anfassen nicht.

    Siehe auch:
    Redenartenindex
    keinen Bissen anrühren - nicht essen

    und Duden:
    1b)
    • von etwas essen, trinken, nehmen, verbrauchen (meist verneint oder eingeschränkt)
      Beispiele
      • das Essen kaum anrühren
      • keine Zigaretten anrühren
     

    Alemanita

    Senior Member
    German, Germany
    "essen nicht angefasst" - Google Search
    Vieles von dem, was ich auf der ersten Seite von 936 (!) Ergebnissen zu sehen bekam, bedeutete tatsächlich: mit den Händen berührt; in einem Fall fehlte ein Komma (Konnte 2 Wochen so gut wie nix sagen nicht essen nicht angefasst werden) ...
     

    Sowka

    Forera und Moderatorin
    German, Northern Germany
    Ja, anrühren (im Zusammenhang mit Essen) wird im übertragenen Sinn gebraucht, anfassen nicht.
    Ich schließe mich der Auffassung von @anahiseri @Alemanita und @JClaudeK an: Essen anfassen bedeutet nur, das Essen mit den Händen zu berühren. Und bei vielen Speisen ist das explizit unerwünscht. ;)

    "Das Essen nicht anrühren" hingegen bedeutet, dass man nicht einmal den kleinsten Anteil davon isst, ob nun mit Besteck oder ohne.
     
    Last edited:

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    Wenn ich Essen nicht anfasse, geht es immer um Essen, dass ich anfassen würde, um es zu essen. Brötchen, Schnitten, Frühstück, Abendbrot.
    Suppe würde nicht dazugehören, Roulade auch nicht, als Beispiele.
    Es ist immer im Kontext zu sehen.
     

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    I am late to this discussion. So forgive me should this point already have been raised and should I have missed it:

    To me the question doesn't arise because I can't think of any context where
    Du hast nicht mal dein Essen angerührt, wieso bist du satt?
    Would make sense. I can only think of contexts where one might say:
    Du hast dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?

    In this case I could imagine an additional sogar:
    Du hast nicht nur etwas übrig gelassen, du hast sogar dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?
     
    Last edited:

    elroy

    Moderator: EHL, Arabic, Hebrew, German(-Spanish)
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    In this case I could imagine an additional sogar:
    Du hast nicht nur etwas übrig gelassen, du hast sogar dein Essen nicht mal angerührt, wieso bist du satt?
    This is interesting. Maybe it works in German because "sogar" and "nicht mal" are not the same word. In English the sentence would sound totally unidiomatic with "even" twice, so much so that I would consider it wrong:

    You didn't just leave some food on your plate, you even didn't even touch your food, how can you be full?

    To express the same nuance as in German, I might say (for example):

    You didn't just leave some food on your plate, you actually didn't even touch your food, how can you be full?
     
    Last edited:

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    Maybe it works in German because "sogar" and "nicht mal" are not the same word.
    This is my assumption, too.

    You didn't just leave some food on your plate, you actually didn't even touch your food, how can you be full?
    Yes, that makes sense. Like the sogar in my German sentence, this actually ist strictly speaking superfluous; it can nevertheless be useful to reinforce the statement.
     
    Last edited:
    Top