An attributive adjective and a noun don't need a comma. A listing or enumeration of coequal, multiple attributive adjectives in front of a noun however does. But of course not the last piece of the chain. When you want to see the enumeration as one semantic unity and therefore see it as a united attributive adjective, simply use the sentence above again. A N (no comma) A, A, A = A* (comma as link; not after the last, not before the first) A* N (semantic; no comma) A, A, A N (commas as links of the enumeration of coequal attributive adjectives) Of course, I can only interpret the rules I've read, for more you have to ask a linguist. And I found the rule of multiple coordinate adjectives for english, and that was what Yujin meant here, I guess. Since I don't own an digital english grammar, let me quote Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma) here: "Between adjectives A comma is used to separate coordinate adjectives; that is, adjectives that directly and equally modify the following noun. Adjectives are considered coordinate if the meaning would be the same if their order were reversed or if and were placed between them. For example: The dull, incessant droning but the cute little cottage. The devious lazy red frog suggests there are lazy red frogs (one of which is devious), while the devious, lazy red frog does not carry this connotation." If those rules are -may- or -must-, is another thing. Also in German: It is highly probable, that the people will understand you, even without the commas. In everyday writing, e.g. facebook and so, most of the people don't use them. But of course that language mustn't be mixed with the standard language. I personally do put the comma and point out pauses of tension with a dash. Daniel

I can just answer to this additional point: "But, if so, why does the adjective closest to the noun ("deutsches", in the example) NOT need a comma, whereas the preceding ones MUST be followed by a comma (if they, indeed, must)?" For all other points and thoughts, I'm as a non-linguist unfortunately qualified. And also on this one, I can only tell you, what the rule is, and what the theory around it could be IMHO. I the reason for commas being there is simply found in the enumeration of several attributive adjectives. One doesn't have or need a comma, of course, since it relates directly to its noun, which is located next to it. "ein deutsches Mädchen" However, adding another coequal attributive adjective, and not using an "und" gives us the comma - maybe just like in normal enumerations. That doesn't have to do anything yet with pointing out important things like in speech. to be continued, due to 2000 sign limit.

Furthermore, now I tried to compare the rules to the english ones. Are you positive on english not needing the commas between adjectives? In all sites or grammar books that are covering that topic, I found the rule: Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma between the final adjective and the noun itself or to use commas with non-coordinate adjectives. To determine, whether you need it or not, you should try to say the adjectives in reverse order. If it still has sense, you should put commas (for coordinate adjectives). At least they say so. And I also thought to remember from my english classes, that the formal english requires adjectives in that case. In French however I know, that they don't use many commas in that case, but more express it with "et". Hope, we can find out, what's correct. Maybe at the end, German and English are not so far away from each other - at least by the formal rules. :) Daniel

Hi Luis, luckily I have informed myself about that topic lately. ;) Oh my, that was you, right? ;) if you have a noun with multiple adjectives, the commas are needed, if the adjectives are coequal. "ein hübsches, schlankes, blondes, deutsches Mädchen." Basically you can determine that with a test of substitution. You just have a look, if you can put a "und" in between the different adjectives. If you can put it, then they are coequal on the semantic level and a comma is needed. If an "und" makes no sense, then you don't put a comma, e.g. "allgemeine soziale Situation". Here, you can -not- say "allgemeine und soziale Lage", cause it makes no sense - the "allgemein" refers to the "social", hence there is no comma, but it gets declinated after the noun. It's different of course with modal or quantificional adjectives: "ein hübsches, außerordentlich schlankes, blondes, deutsches Mädchen." No declination there... So, in your sentence, you need the commas, cause the adjectives are sematically coequal. Still, they all have the ending referring to the noun. When they are equal it's basically just an enumeration. Every single adjective could stand alone. So possibility 1) is correct. Well, it's unexpected for you, but goes perfectly after the German rules! ;) Lesson: German is not English and not Spanish... and it's weird :P Positive about that is, that you can point out the special meaning of a sentence by using or not using commas. An example from Wikipedia: 1. Bei der Produktion werden neue, umweltfreundliche Verfahren angewandt. 2. Bei der Produktion werden neue umweltfreundliche Verfahren angewandt. For what they both mean and additional information, have a look at that chapter (German though): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommaregeln#Reihungen_von_Adjektiven Regards, Daniel

Ho Mary_Qin, I believe you Talk about those expressions that repeat themselves in every fairytale. The start often is: "Es war einmal, (vor langer, langer Zeit)..." like "once upon a time". The optional addition just renders a stronger effect, but isn't necessary. The end of course depends on the story, but since it's often about two people finally being together, we say: "Und wenn sie nicht gestorben sind, dann leben sie noch heute." translated "and if they haven't died yet, they still live today". This is giving an interesting feeling of mystic to the end, even if maybe the story didn't have anything about a witch or so. Just mentioning, that they still live today, if they haven't died (a pretty basic knowledge on the one hand) opens up the possibility that they could have lived on, even if it's not normal. In my experience this is leaving the kid with a fascination. Viele Grüße, Daniel

Hallo Tiffany, "Saß" ist Präteritum von "sitzen" "Saß" is Simple past of "sitzen" - to sit Ein Wiesel sitzt (present - "sits") -> Ein Wiesel saß (past - "sat") Greetings, Daniel

Hallo Felicia, deine Fragen sind immer sehr toll und treffen interessante Themen und Fälle. Da macht Deutsch wieder richtig Spaß. ;) In der Tat ist das Subjekt in diesem Satz "Das Prinzip der Zusammenarbeit aller", obwohl nur "das Prinzip" im Nominativ steht. Was wir hier haben, ist ein sogenannter Genitivus definitivus kombiniert mit einer Genitiv-Verkettung. Ein Genitivus definitivus ist eine Spezifizierung des abstrakten Subjekts durch andere Wörter, so dass ein genauerer Sinn entsteht. Damit erzeugt man ein Genitiv-Attribut, das zum Subjekt gehört. In deinem Fall haben wir sogar zwei solcher Attribute, also eine sehr genaue Spezifizierung des Subjekts. Die drei Teile sind: "Das Prinzip" "Die Zusammenarbeit" -> Genitiv: "der Zusammenarbeit" "alle" -> Genitiv: "aller" Man verbindet einfach das Nominativ-Subjekt mit den verketteten Genitivattributen und hat das neue Subjekt: "Das Prinzip der Zusammenarbeit aller" Solche Konstruktionen sind in der Hochsprache, bzw. der akademischen Literatur oft zu finden. Der Vorteil solcher Konstruktionen ist, dass man eine sehr genaue Idee des Subjekts erhält, was in der Philosophischen Methode natürlich unabdingbar ist. Das bedeutet, dass du sie bei Adorno/Horkheimer noch öfter finden wirst. ;) Bei der Umstellung des Satzes kann ich Otto zustimmen, würde aber das zweite Attribut nicht unterschlagen, weil es ja zur Beschreibung des Prinzip benutzt wird und nicht einfach unterschlagen werden darf: "Unsere Arbeit wird bestimmt durch das Prinzip der Zusammenarbeit aller". Damit hast du nun ein Akkusativobjekt mit einer Genitivattributsverkettung. ;) Viele Grüße, Daniel

Allergien sind immer schrecklich

Heute hat meine Allergie kein Erbarmen mit mir. Ich denke, ich muss weniger Molke zu mir nehmen, denn wenn trinke oder esse, läuft der Rotz schonungslos. Es tut mir leid wenn das ekelhaft ist, aber es ist die Wahrheit :P.

Der Sommer ist sehr schön und wundervoll, aber wenn der Rotz läuft, und das Niesen mich tötet, hasse ich ihn für immer [?].

Außerdem habe ich meine Schulbücher gekauft. Die Frau, der ich sie abkaufte, hat erschreckende, hervorgetretene Augen. Als sie in das Haus gegangen ist, um mir Kleingeld zu bringen, habe ich meine Augen an meiner Freundin [bauschte - I don't know what you want to say with that], und sie hat gelacht :D

[to suck - we don't use "saugen" in that sense. You could use "schrecklich sein" or "gewaltig stinken" or also "Mist sein"] 
[until eternity - für immer]
[the expression "in other news" doesn't work like that in German. Just say "Außerdem"]
[bauschte - if you meant, that you glanced at each other and she laughed, I would write: 
"Als sie in das Haus gegangen ist, um mir Kleingeld zu bringen, habe ich meine Freundin angeschaut und sie hat gelacht :D"]