Learn Hardcore German: Meine Tochter liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen, statt lange Serien zu schauen. - My daughter loves to draw animals instead of watching series for a long time.

Verbs like lieben, hassen, mögen, genießen often take a clause as their object:
- Ich hasse es, früh aufzustehen.
- Sie mag es, laut Musik zu hören.
The es stands in the normal object position, and the real content (the zu‑infinitive clause) comes later:
- Meine Tochter liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen.
  ≈ My daughter loves it, to draw animals.

Is Meine Tochter liebt, Tiere zu zeichnen wrong?

It’s grammatically possible, but sounds unusual or literary and is rarely used in everyday speech.
Native speakers almost always use es in this structure. So you should treat [Verb] + es, ... zu [Verb] as the natural pattern.

Why is it Meine Tochter and not Mein Tochter?

Tochter is a feminine noun (die Tochter).

In the nominative singular:
- masculine: mein Sohn
- feminine: meine Tochter
- neuter: mein Kind

So we need the feminine form meine. The word is capitalized as Meine only because it’s at the beginning of the sentence.

What is the role of zu in Tiere zu zeichnen and lange Serien zu schauen?

zu creates an infinitive construction, similar to English to draw, to watch.

zeichnen = (to) draw
zu zeichnen = to draw as an infinitive phrase
schauen = (to) watch
zu schauen = to watch as an infinitive phrase

After certain verbs and expressions (like lieben, versuchen, anfangen, hoffen, etc.) German uses zu + infinitive to express actions in a general, non-finite way:

Sie versucht, Deutsch zu lernen.
Er hofft, bald anzukommen.

Word order rule: zu stands right before the infinitive, at the end of its clause:

Tiere zu zeichnen
lange Serien zu schauen

With separable verbs, zu goes between prefix and stem:

fernsehen → fernzusehen
aufstehen → aufzustehen

Why do the verbs zeichnen and schauen go at the end of their parts of the sentence?

Tiere zu zeichnen and lange Serien zu schauen are infinitive groups (Infinitivgruppen). In these groups, the verb goes to the end, just like in normal subordinate clauses.

Structure:

[object] + zu + [infinitive]
- Tiere zu zeichnen
- lange Serien zu schauen

So you cannot say zu Tiere zeichnen; zeichnen must be at the end:

correct: Tiere zu zeichnen
incorrect: zu Tiere zeichnen

Why is there a comma before Tiere zu zeichnen, and is it mandatory?

In the sentence:

Meine Tochter liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen, statt lange Serien zu schauen.

we have two commas:

..., liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen, ...
- This comma before Tiere zu zeichnen marks the zu‑infinitive group.
- According to modern rules, this comma is optional in many cases.
- Both are correct:
  - Meine Tochter liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen, ...
  - Meine Tochter liebt es Tiere zu zeichnen, ...
Most careful writing keeps the comma because it makes the structure clearer.
..., statt lange Serien zu schauen.
- Here statt introduces another zu‑infinitive group.
- When um, ohne, statt, anstatt, außer, als introduce an infinitive group, the comma before that group is mandatory.
- So the comma before statt must be there.

Why is Tiere used without any article?

In German, plural nouns can often appear without an article when you mean them in a general sense.

Meine Tochter liebt Tiere.
= She loves animals (in general).
Meine Tochter liebt die Tiere.
= She loves the animals (specific animals, known from context).

In Tiere zu zeichnen, we are talking about the activity of drawing animals in general, not some specific animals. That’s why we can (and usually do) omit an article.

The same logic applies to lange Serien here: we mean long series in general, not some particular ones.

Why is it lange Serien and not langen Serien?

Look at the phrase lange Serien zu schauen:

schauen is a transitive verb here: you watch something.
That something (the direct object) is Serien.

So:

Serien is in the accusative plural.
Serie is feminine (die Serie), plural die Serien.
With no article (strong declension), the adjective in the accusative plural takes -e:
- nominative plural: lange Serien
- accusative plural: lange Serien

So lange Serien is the correct form.
langen Serien would be dative or genitive plural, and that doesn’t fit here.

Does statt not require the genitive? Should it be something like statt langer Serien?

statt can take the genitive, but only when it functions as a preposition before a noun phrase:

statt der langen Serien = instead of the long series (genitive)
statt langer Serien = instead of long series (also genitive)

In your sentence, statt does not govern Serien directly. It introduces an infinitive group:

statt [lange Serien zu schauen]

Inside that group, lange Serien is the direct object of schauen, so it must be in the accusative, not the genitive.

That’s why lange Serien (accusative) is correct here, not langer Serien.

Why is it Serien schauen and not Serien sehen? What about gucken?

German has several everyday verbs for to watch:

sehen – basic, neutral see
schauen – look/watch; very common in southern Germany, Austria
gucken – look/watch; very common in northern/colloquial German

All three can be used for watching TV:

eine Serie sehen
eine Serie schauen
eine Serie gucken

Serien schauen is a very common and natural collocation, roughly to watch series. You could say Serien sehen instead; the meaning is practically the same, though the regional feel and style can change slightly:

Serien schauen – feels very natural in many regions, maybe a bit more “TV-watching”-specific.
Serien sehen – absolutely correct, slightly more neutral.
Serien gucken – clearly colloquial.

So the choice of schauen here is stylistic, not a hard grammar requirement.

Can we change the word order, for example start with Statt lange Serien zu schauen or move that part into the middle?

Yes, you can move these infinitive groups around, within limits. Some options:

Original:
- Meine Tochter liebt es, Tiere zu zeichnen, statt lange Serien zu schauen.
Fronting the statt-group:
- Statt lange Serien zu schauen, liebt meine Tochter es, Tiere zu zeichnen.
- Emphasis: the instead-of-watching-series part is highlighted.
Putting statt ... in the middle:
- Meine Tochter liebt es, statt lange Serien zu schauen, Tiere zu zeichnen.
- Emphasis: the contrast between the two activities is brought closer together.

All are grammatical. What changes is mainly rhythm and emphasis, not the core meaning.

Could we rephrase this without es and zu‑infinitives, for example using lieber?

Yes, there are natural alternatives that sound very idiomatic:

Meine Tochter zeichnet lieber Tiere, als lange Serien zu schauen.
Meine Tochter zeichnet lieber Tiere, statt lange Serien zu schauen.

Here:

lieber is the comparative of gern, and means rather / prefer to.
The structure is:
- [Subjekt] + [Verb] + lieber + [Aktivität A], statt/als [Aktivität B zu machen].

This focuses more directly on the preference: she would rather draw animals than watch long series.
The original liebt es, ... zu ... construction sounds a bit more descriptive of a general habit.

Could we also say statt lange Serien zu sehen or statt lange Serien zu fernsehen?

You can say statt lange Serien zu sehen; that’s a perfectly normal alternative to zu schauen.

However, fernsehen works slightly differently:

fernsehen is intransitive and usually doesn’t take a direct object:
- Sie sieht gern fern. (She likes watching TV.)
- Sie liebt es, fernzusehen.

So statt lange Serien zu fernsehen is not idiomatic. You would normally say:

statt fernzusehen (instead of watching TV)
statt lange Serien zu sehen/schauen/gucken (instead of watching long series)

So the best alternatives are:

statt lange Serien zu sehen
statt fernzusehen (if you want to talk about TV in general, not specifically series).