In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet, in der Gegenwart male ich fast täglich.

Breakdown of In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet, in der Gegenwart male ich fast täglich.

in
in
ich
I
haben
to have
kaum
hardly
täglich
daily
fast
almost
die Vergangenheit
the past
zeichnen
to draw
die Gegenwart
the present
malen
to paint
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching German grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning German now

Questions & Answers about In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet, in der Gegenwart male ich fast täglich.

Why is it In der Vergangenheit and not In die Vergangenheit?

The preposition in can take either accusative or dative in German:

  • Accusative = movement/direction (into something)
  • Dative = location/state (in/at a place or time)

Here, we are talking about a time period as a state (in the past, during the past), not movement into the past. So we use dative:

  • in der Vergangenheit = in the past (time/condition) → dative
  • in die Vergangenheit reisen = to travel into the past → accusative (movement)

The same logic applies to in der Gegenwart (in the present).


Why is it der Vergangenheit and der Gegenwart? What case and gender are they?

Both Vergangenheit and Gegenwart are:

  • Gender: feminine
  • Number: singular
  • Case: dative

Feminine definite article declension (singular) is:

  • Nominative: die Vergangenheit / die Gegenwart
  • Accusative: die Vergangenheit / die Gegenwart
  • Dative: der Vergangenheit / der Gegenwart
  • Genitive: der Vergangenheit / der Gegenwart

Because in is used here with a static time reference (“in the past / in the present”), it takes the dative, so we get in der Vergangenheit, in der Gegenwart.


Why are Vergangenheit and Gegenwart capitalized?

In German, all nouns are capitalized.

  • Vergangenheit (the past) is a noun.
  • Gegenwart (the present) is a noun.

That’s why both are written with a capital letter.

By contrast, täglich is an adverb/adjective, so it is not capitalized.


Why does the sentence start with In der Vergangenheit? Could I also say Ich habe in der Vergangenheit kaum gezeichnet?

Yes, you can say:

  • Ich habe in der Vergangenheit kaum gezeichnet.

German main clauses must have the conjugated verb in second position (the V2 rule). The first position can be many things: subject, time, object, etc.

  1. Time phrase first (for emphasis/contrast):

    • In der Vergangenheit (1st position)
    • habe (2nd position: verb)
    • ich kaum gezeichnet (rest)
  2. Subject first (more neutral):

    • Ich (1st)
    • habe (2nd: verb)
    • in der Vergangenheit kaum gezeichnet (rest)

Putting In der Vergangenheit at the beginning emphasizes the contrast between past and present.


Why is it habe ich kaum gezeichnet and not ich habe kaum gezeichnet after the comma?

Look at the whole first clause:

  • In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet

The first element is In der Vergangenheit (a time phrase). Because of the verb-second rule, the next element must be the conjugated verb (habe). The subject (ich) comes after that:

  1. In der Vergangenheit – first position (time)
  2. habe – second position (finite verb)
  3. ich kaum gezeichnet – rest of the clause

You could make another sentence (independent of the second clause):

  • Ich habe in der Vergangenheit kaum gezeichnet. (subject first)

But as written, the structure is perfectly correct and highlights the time expression.


Why does the first part use habe … gezeichnet (present perfect) but the second part uses male (present tense)?

First clause:

  • habe … gezeichnet = present perfect (Perfekt)

In contemporary spoken German, the Perfekt is the normal way to talk about completed actions in the past, especially in everyday language:

  • Ich habe kaum gezeichnet. = I hardly drew / I have hardly drawn.

Second clause:

  • male = present tense

This describes a current, ongoing habit:

  • ich male fast täglich = I paint almost every day (nowadays).

So the tense choice supports the meaning:

  • Past, completed low activity → habe … gezeichnet
  • Present, habitual activity → male

You could use the simple past (ich zeichnete kaum) in written, literary German, but habe kaum gezeichnet is more natural in modern everyday style.


What is the difference between zeichnen and malen?

Both translate to to draw / to paint, but there’s a clear nuance:

  • zeichnen:

    • to draw with lines
    • typically with pencil, pen, charcoal, etc.
    • Focuses on line work and contours.
    • Example: Ich zeichne mit Bleistift. – I draw with pencil.
  • malen:

    • to paint (also sometimes “to color in”)
    • with paints (watercolor, acrylic, oil), or sometimes crayons/markers
    • Focus is on color and painting as an activity.
    • Example: Ich male ein Bild. – I paint a picture.

In the sentence:

  • kaum gezeichnet = hardly did any drawing (earlier)
  • male ich fast täglich = now I paint almost every day

The speaker is contrasting their past drawing activity with their present painting habit. In everyday conversation, many Germans don’t always keep this distinction perfectly strict, but it does exist.


What does kaum mean here, and how is it different from fast in fast täglich?

They look similar but mean different things:

  • kaumhardly / barely / scarcely

    • Suggests a very small amount, almost none.
    • Ich habe kaum gezeichnet. = I hardly drew at all.
  • fastalmost / nearly

    • Suggests that something happens very often, but not quite completely.
    • Ich male fast täglich. = I paint almost daily (maybe 5–6 days a week).

So:

  • kaum gezeichnet → almost never
  • fast täglich → very often, but not literally every single day

Why is there a comma before in der Gegenwart?

The sentence contains two main clauses:

  1. In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet,
  2. in der Gegenwart male ich fast täglich.

In German, a comma is required between two independent main clauses that are simply placed side by side, even if there is no conjunction like und or aber.

So the comma separates:

  • Past statement
  • Present statement

You could also write with a conjunction:

  • In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet, aber in der Gegenwart male ich fast täglich.

The comma would still be there, now before aber.


Could I leave out in der Gegenwart and just say …, jetzt male ich fast täglich?

Yes, that would be very natural:

  • Früher habe ich kaum gezeichnet, jetzt male ich fast täglich.
  • In der Vergangenheit habe ich kaum gezeichnet, jetzt male ich fast täglich.

Jetzt (now) or heute (today/these days) are common, idiomatic time adverbs.
In der Gegenwart is correct, but it can sound a bit more formal/abstract or stylistic.

You can also combine similar forms:

  • Früher habe ich kaum gezeichnet, heute male ich fast täglich.

They all express a contrast between past behavior and present habit.


Why is it fast täglich and not täglich fast? Where should time adverbs go?

The usual order in German for simple adverbs is:

  • Time – Manner – Place (rough rule)
  • Inside a time phrase, you normally go from degree → time word.

So:

  • Ich male fast täglich.
    • male (verb)
    • fast (degree adverb)
    • täglich (time adverb)

fast täglich is a fixed, natural-sounding unit (“almost daily”).
täglich fast is grammatically possible in some contexts, but it sounds unusual or emphasizes fast in a strange way. In this sentence, fast täglich is the idiomatic choice.


What form is gezeichnet? How is it formed?

gezeichnet is the past participle of zeichnen.

Formation:

  • Infinitive: zeichnen
  • Stem: zeichn-
  • Past participle: ge
    • zeichn
      • etgezeichnet

Why -et and not just -t?
For many verbs whose stems end in -dn, -gn, -chn, -fn, etc., German adds an extra e for pronunciation:

  • arbeitengearbeitet
  • zeichnengezeichnet

This participle is used:

  • With haben to form the Perfekt:
    • Ich habe gezeichnet.
  • As an adjective/participle:
    • eine gezeichnete Figur – a drawn figure.

In your sentence, it’s part of habe ich kaum gezeichnet (present perfect).


Is there a more natural everyday way to express the same idea?

Yes, in everyday spoken German, people would more often say e.g.:

  • Früher habe ich kaum gezeichnet, heute male ich fast jeden Tag.
  • Früher habe ich kaum gezeichnet, jetzt male ich fast jeden Tag.

Differences:

  • Früher = in the past / earlier (more colloquial than in der Vergangenheit).
  • heute or jetzt = today / now, these days (more colloquial than in der Gegenwart).
  • fast jeden Tag ≈ almost every day, similar to fast täglich but a bit more conversational.

Your original sentence is correct and clear; these versions just sound more like typical everyday speech.