How do you put a subordinate or relative clause within another subordinate clause?

Mozzerfan99

Senior Member
English - England
Hi,
So for example, how would I phrase the following:

Because, whenever it rains, you get wet.
Weil, wenn es regnet, man nass wird (because weil sends the verb to the end)
or Weil, wenn es regnet, wird man nass (ignoring weil, because the verb has to come directly after the wenn clause)?

And also how does it work with relative clauses:

Because everyone who works gets money.
Weil jeder, der arbeitet, Geld bekommt.
Weil jeder, der arbeitet, bekommt Geld.

Danke im Voraus :)
 
  • Kajjo

    Senior Member
    :tick: Weil jeder, der arbeitet, Geld bekommt.
    :cross: Weil jeder, der arbeitet, bekommt Geld.

    The sentence with inserted "wenn es regnet", is just weird in both versions. Usually "weil" introduces a subordinate clause and it is bad style to have subordinate clauses without associated main clause. Only as direct answer to a question, such "weil"-clauses are common and than the topic of the question is thought to be the elided main clause.
     

    JClaudeK

    Senior Member
    Français France, Deutsch (SW-Dtl.)
    Usually "weil" introduces a subordinate clause and it is bad style to have subordinate clauses without associated main clause.
    Anyway, as far as I know, two subordinate conjunctions put together are never allowed.
    But you could say: ....., denn wenn es regnet, wird man nass.
     

    bearded

    Senior Member
    Wie wäre es mit ''Weil man, wenn es regnet, nass wird'' ?
    Es hört sich zwar nicht so schön an, aber ist es auch grammatisch falsch?
    / It does not sound too good, but is it grammatically wrong?
     

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    Wie wäre es mit ''Weil man, wenn es regnet, nass wird'' ?
    Es hört sich zwar nicht so schön an, aber ist es auch grammatisch falsch?
    / It does not sound too good, but is it grammatically wrong?
    Kajjo's comment applies to that version all the same. A clause introduced with weil always has subordinate clause word order and can occur stand alone only as a direct answer to a question that represents the main clause to which this subordinate clause is linked.
     

    Perseas

    Senior Member
    Greek
    Wie wäre es mit ''Weil man, wenn es regnet, nass wird'' ?
    berndf, JClaudeK and Kajjo have already answered, but I would like to ask this. Wouldn't it be a better style if the "weil"-sentence were not interrupted by another subordinate clause? I mean: "Weil man nass wird, wenn es regnet".
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    The examples do not fit the heading.
    It should be eg.:
    Er kommt nicht mit, weil man, wenn es regnet, nass wird.
    Grammatically correct but clumsy style is:
    Er kommt, weil man, wenn es regnet, nass wird, nicht mit.
    This is called Schachtelsatz.

    The topic is Nebensatz innerhalb eines Nebensatzes. Not: Nebensatz nach einem Nebensatz.

    Mozzerfan just omitted the main clauses.
     
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >
    Top