……
Breakdown of Es ist riskant, ohne Helm zu fahren.
sein
to be
zu
to
es
it
fahren
to ride
ohne
without
der Helm
the helmet
riskant
risky
Questions & Answers about Es ist riskant, ohne Helm zu fahren.
What does the Es do here? Is it necessary?
Es is a dummy (anticipatory) subject. The real content subject is the infinitive clause ohne Helm zu fahren, which is “extraposed” to the end. German often uses this pattern:
- Es ist [adjective], … zu [verb]. You can also front the infinitive clause and drop es:
- Ohne Helm zu fahren ist riskant.
Why is there a comma before ohne?
Because the infinitive group is introduced by ohne. In German, infinitive clauses must be set off by a comma if they’re introduced by words like um, ohne, (an)statt, außer, als. So the comma in Es ist riskant, ohne Helm zu fahren. is mandatory.
Why is it ohne Helm? Which case is that, and why is there no article?
- ohne always takes the accusative.
- Helm is masculine; accusative singular is the same as nominative when there’s no article.
- No article is used because this is a general/generic statement (“without a helmet” in general). You could also say:
- definite: ohne den Helm
- indefinite: ohne einen Helm But ohne Helm is the most idiomatic in general statements.
Could I say ohne einen Helm instead of ohne Helm?
Yes: Es ist riskant, ohne einen Helm zu fahren. It’s correct but heavier. The bare form ohne Helm is more natural for generic “without a helmet” statements. Using an article can add slight emphasis (“without a helmet (at all)”).
Why do we need zu fahren? Can I say Es ist riskant, ohne Helm fahren?
In this “anticipatory es” structure (Es ist …, … zu [verb]), German requires zu before the infinitive. So here you must say … zu fahren. If you want a version without zu, rephrase:
- Es ist riskant, wenn man ohne Helm fährt.
Can I put the infinitive clause first?
Yes:
- Ohne Helm zu fahren ist riskant. This avoids the dummy es and is fully correct.
Do I ever omit zu in the fronted version?
Often, yes, especially in everyday style:
- Ohne Helm fahren ist riskant. This is a different construction (a bare infinitive phrase used as subject), not just “dropping” zu from the extraposed pattern. In careful writing, Ohne Helm zu fahren is a bit more formal; both are acceptable.
What exactly does fahren mean here—drive a car or ride a bike/motorcycle?
fahren can mean “to drive” (a car) or “to ride” (a bike or motorcycle). The helmet context suggests bicycle or motorcycle. To be explicit, add what you’re riding:
- Es ist riskant, ohne Helm Motorrad zu fahren.
- Es ist riskant, ohne Helm Fahrrad zu fahren. You can also specify the helmet type:
- Es ist riskant, ohne Fahrradhelm zu fahren.
How would I make it clearly about cycling?
Use Fahrrad or Fahrradhelm:
- Es ist riskant, ohne Fahrradhelm zu fahren.
- Es ist riskant, ohne Helm Fahrrad zu fahren.
- Ohne Helm Rad zu fahren ist riskant.
Could I say it with a “when”-clause instead of zu?
Yes:
- Es ist riskant, wenn man ohne Helm fährt. This is a very natural alternative. Avoid Es ist riskant, dass man … here; that sounds odd in German.
What’s the nuance difference between riskant and gefährlich?
- riskant = involves taking a risk; it can sound slightly evaluative (“a risky choice/behavior”).
- gefährlich = dangerous, likely to cause harm. Both work here:
- Es ist gefährlich, ohne Helm zu fahren.
Does riskant change form here?
No. After sein, adjectives are predicative and do not take endings:
- Es ist riskant. Attributive use would decline:
- Eine riskante Entscheidung (“a risky decision”).
Where do extra words go inside the infinitive clause (e.g., adverbs)?
Modifiers typically come before zu + infinitive:
- Es ist riskant, ohne Helm schnell zu fahren.
- Es ist riskant, nachts ohne Helm zu fahren. With separable verbs, zu goes between prefix and stem:
- Es ist riskant, ohne Helm loszufahren.
Is the word order … zu fahren, ohne Helm possible?
You’d normally keep ohne Helm before zu fahren. Postposing it (… zu fahren, ohne Helm) is possible for emphasis or if the phrase is long, but in simple sentences it feels marked. Prefer … ohne Helm zu fahren.
What’s the gender and plural of Helm?
- Gender: masculine — der Helm
- Accusative singular: den Helm, indefinite einen Helm
- Plural: die Helme Examples:
- ohne den Helm
- ohne Helme (e.g., “They arrived without helmets”)
Can I rephrase it to focus on wearing a helmet rather than riding?
Yes:
- Es ist riskant, beim Fahren keinen Helm zu tragen.
- Es ist riskant, den Helm nicht zu tragen (beim Fahren). Also possible: Es ist sicherer, mit Helm zu fahren.
Is there an adjective alternative to ohne Helm?
Yes, helmlos:
- Es ist riskant, helmlos zu fahren. This is correct but less common than ohne Helm in everyday speech.
More from this lesson
AI Language TutorTry it ↗
“How do German cases work?”
German has four grammatical cases: nominative (subject), accusative (direct object), dative (indirect object), and genitive (possession). The case determines the form of articles and adjectives. For example, "the dog" is "der Hund" as a subject but "den Hund" as a direct object.
Sign up free — start using our AI language tutor
Start learning GermanMaster German — from Es ist riskant, ohne Helm zu fahren to fluency
All course content and exercises are completely free — no paywalls, no trial periods.
- ✓ Infinitely deep — unlimited vocabulary and grammar
- ✓ Fast-paced — build complex sentences from the start
- ✓ Unforgettable — efficient spaced repetition system
- ✓ AI tutor to answer your grammar questions