Breakdown of Er hat absichtlich laut gesprochen, was viele störte.
haben
to have
er
he
viele
many
laut
loudly
sprechen
to speak
was
which
absichtlich
intentionally
stören
to bother
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching German grammar and vocabulary.
Questions & Answers about Er hat absichtlich laut gesprochen, was viele störte.
What does "was" refer to here, and why is it "was"?
It refers to the entire preceding idea Er hat absichtlich laut gesprochen (“that fact/which”). In German, when a relative clause refers to a whole clause/idea (or to alles, nichts, etwas, vieles, or a superlative), you use was, not das or welches.
Why is "störte" singular and not "störten"?
Because the subject of the relative clause is was (neuter singular), not viele. Pattern: [etw.] stört [jdn.] → here: was (subject) störte viele (accusative object).
Is the comma before "was" required, and why is the verb at the end?
Yes. Was viele störte is a subordinate (relative) clause; German requires commas around subordinate clauses, and the finite verb goes to the end: … was viele störte.
Why are two different past tenses used: "hat gesprochen" (Perfekt) and "störte" (Präteritum)?
Mixing tenses like this is allowed. Alternatives:
- More written: Er sprach absichtlich laut, was viele störte.
- More spoken: Er hat absichtlich laut gesprochen, was viele gestört hat.
Why "hat gesprochen" and not "ist gesprochen"?
Most verbs form the Perfekt with haben; sein is mainly for intransitive motion/change-of-state and a few others (sein/bleiben/passieren). Sprechen/reden take haben: er hat gesprochen/geredet.
What are the principal parts of "sprechen" and "stören"?
- sprechen – sprach – gesprochen (irregular/strong)
- stören – störte – gestört (regular/weak)
Is the order "absichtlich laut gesprochen" fixed? Could I say "laut absichtlich gesprochen"?
Keep absichtlich before laut: absichtlich laut gesprochen sounds natural; laut absichtlich sounds odd. With more adverbials, a handy guideline is Te–Ka–Mo–Lo (time–cause–manner–place): Er hat heute absichtlich laut gesprochen.
What exactly does "viele" mean here, and why is there no noun?
Viele is an indefinite pronoun meaning “many (people)”; the noun (Leute/Menschen) is understood. Case is accusative plural: was (subject) störte viele (object).
Could I use "das" instead of "was": "…, das viele störte"?
No. Das needs a specific neuter noun as its antecedent. To refer to the whole preceding idea, German uses was. If you name a noun, use the gendered relative: Die Lautstärke, die viele störte.
Would "Er sprach absichtlich laut, was viele störte" also be correct?
Yes. That’s the Präteritum version, typical for written narrative. Same meaning and structure.
Can I say "…, was viele gestört hat" instead of "…, was viele störte"?
Yes. That’s Perfekt in the relative clause and sounds more colloquial/spoken. Both are correct.
Difference between "absichtlich", "mit Absicht", "bewusst", and "extra"?
- absichtlich / mit Absicht: intentionally, on purpose (neutral).
- bewusst: consciously (focus on awareness, not necessarily intention).
- extra: expressly/on purpose (can sound a bit pointed: “He did it on purpose”).
Does "laut" here mean "according to"? And how do I compare it?
Here laut is an adverb “loudly.” Don’t confuse it with the preposition laut (“according to”): laut dem Bericht. Comparison: laut – lauter – am lautesten; intensifier: lauthals sprechen (“at the top of one’s lungs”).
Why isn’t there a "zu" before "sprechen"?
Because hat gesprochen is a finite perfect form, not an infinitive clause. You’d use zu with an infinitive like um laut zu sprechen.
Could I express the result with "sodass/weil" instead of the relative clause?
Yes, with a slightly different focus:
- Result: Er hat absichtlich laut gesprochen, sodass sich viele gestört fühlten.
- Cause: Weil er absichtlich laut gesprochen hat, fühlten sich viele gestört.