Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.

The farmer opens the stable early so that the cows can go to the meadow.

Breakdown of Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.

• gehen: to go
• früh: early
• können: can
• öffnen: to open
• damit: so that
• auf: onto
• die Wiese: the meadow
• der Bauer: the farmer
• die Kuh: the cow
• der Stall: the stable

Questions & Answers about Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.

Why is it der Bauer and not den Bauer or dem Bauer?

Der Bauer is the subject of the sentence – the person who performs the action of opening the stable.

In German, the subject takes the nominative case.
For a masculine noun like Bauer, the definite article in each case is:

• Nominative: der Bauer – subject (who opens?)
• Accusative: den Bauer – direct object (whom does someone see / help / love?)
• Dative: dem Bauer – indirect object (to/for whom?)

Since the farmer is doing the action (opening), he must be in nominative: der Bauer.

Why is den Stall and not der Stall?

Den Stall is the direct object in the sentence – it is what is being opened.

German marks the direct object with the accusative case.
For a masculine noun like Stall, the definite article changes:

• Nominative (subject): der Stall – e.g. Der Stall ist groß. (The stable is big.)
• Accusative (direct object): den Stall – e.g. Er öffnet den Stall. (He opens the stable.)

In Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, the stable is not doing anything; it is being acted on.
So accusative is required: den Stall.

Why is früh placed between öffnet and den Stall? Could I say Der Bauer öffnet den Stall früh?

Both are possible:

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall.
• Der Bauer öffnet den Stall früh.

The difference is subtle:

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall.
  Slightly stronger focus on how early he opens it (time information comes sooner).

• Der Bauer öffnet den Stall früh.
  Slightly more neutral in rhythm; first “what” he opens, then “when”.

General tendency in German main clauses:

• Verb in 2nd position: Der Bauer öffnet ...
• Then you have the “middle field”, where you can put adverbs and objects.
• Order in that middle field often follows the pattern:
  time – manner – place – direct object – other stuff, but this is flexible.

So früh (time) before den Stall (object) is very natural.
Putting früh at the very end (… den Stall früh) is also grammatically correct, just a bit less typical in neutral style.

Why is there a comma before damit?

In German, subordinate clauses must be separated from the main clause by a comma.

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, ← main clause
• damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können. ← subordinate clause (introduced by damit)

Because damit introduces a subordinate clause, you must write a comma before it:

• …, damit … is always written with a comma in modern German spelling.

What exactly does damit mean here, and how is it different from um … zu?

In this sentence, damit means “so that” / “in order that” and introduces a purpose clause (a clause of intention):

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.
  → He opens it early so that the cows can go to the meadow.

Difference from um … zu:

• damit is used when the subject of the main clause and the subject of the purpose clause are different:

  • Der Bauer öffnet den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.
    (farmer vs cows → different subjects → use damit)

• um … zu is used when the subject is the same in both parts:

  • Der Bauer öffnet den Stall, um die Kühe auf die Wiese zu bringen.
    (the farmer opens the stable in order to bring the cows to the meadow – subject “he” in both actions)

So here, because der Bauer and die Kühe are different subjects, damit is the correct choice.

Why is the verb at the end in damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können?

Because damit introduces a subordinate clause. In German subordinate clauses, the finite verb (the conjugated verb) goes to the end of the clause.

Structure here:

• damit – subordinator
• die Kühe – subject
• auf die Wiese – prepositional phrase
• gehen – infinitive (main action)
• können – finite (conjugated) modal verb → goes last

So the rule is:

• Subordinate clause word order: [subordinator] + [subject] + … + [non-finite verbs] + [finite verb]

That’s why we have:

• …, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.
  and not
• …, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese können gehen. (incorrect)

Why is it gehen können and not können gehen at the end?

In main clauses with a modal verb, you normally say:

• Die Kühe können auf die Wiese gehen.
  (finite modal können in position 2, infinitive gehen at the end)

But in subordinate clauses, when you have a modal verb + another verb, the order at the end changes:

• Infinitive first, then the finite modal last.

So:

• Main clause: Die Kühe können auf die Wiese gehen.
• Subordinate clause: …, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können.

This end-position order (infinitive + finite modal) is regular in subordinate clauses with modal verbs in standard written German.

Could the sentence just say …, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen without können?

Yes, that is grammatically possible:

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen.

However, there is a small nuance:

• With gehen alone, it can sound more like “so that the cows go” – a bit closer to a factual outcome or expectation.
• With gehen können, it is more clearly “so that the cows are able to go / have the possibility to go.”

So gehen können emphasizes the possibility, ability, permission.
Both are correct; gehen können is very natural in this context.

Why is it auf die Wiese (accusative) and not auf der Wiese (dative)?

Auf is a two-way preposition (Wechselpräposition).
With such prepositions, the case depends on the meaning:

• Accusative → movement towards a place (direction, goal)
• Dative → no movement, just location (where something is)

Here, the cows are going to the meadow (movement towards a goal), so:

• auf die Wiese (accusative, feminine: die Wiese → auf die Wiese)

If we were only describing where they are standing, we would use dative:

• Die Kühe stehen auf der Wiese.
  (dative, feminine: die Wiese → auf der Wiese, because no movement)

Why is it die Wiese and not something like die Weide or zur Wiese?

You could use other expressions, but they are not identical in nuance:

• die Wiese – meadow / grassy area in general. More neutral, can be any grass field.
• die Weide – pasture, grazing land. More specifically where animals graze, a bit more “farm-specific”.

So die Wiese works perfectly; die Weide would emphasize it more clearly as grazing land.

About zur Wiese:

• zur Wiese = zu der Wiese (“to the meadow”)
  This expresses movement towards the meadow but not necessarily onto it.
• auf die Wiese = onto the meadow, focusing on the cows moving onto the grassy area itself.

In this context, auf die Wiese gehen is the most idiomatic way to say that the cows go out onto the meadow to be there.

Why is it die Kühe and not die Kuhen or Kühen?

The singular noun is die Kuh (the cow).

Its normal plural is die Kühe:

• eine Kuh → viele Kühe

Notice two changes:

1. Umlaut: u → ü
2. -e ending added: Kuh → Kühe

So:

• Nominative plural: die Kühe (subject: die Kühe gehen …)
• Dative plural: den Kühen (e.g. Er gibt den Kühen Futter. – He gives food to the cows.)

In this sentence, die Kühe is the subject of the subordinate clause (wer geht? → die Kühe), so nominative plural die Kühe is correct.
Kuhen by itself is never correct; it must be Kühe (nominative/accusative plural) or Kühen (dative plural).

Why is früh written without any ending (like frühe or frühen)?

Here, früh is an adverb, describing when the farmer opens the stable: he opens it early.

Adverbs in German do not get endings:

• Er steht früh auf.
• Sie kommt spät.
• Wir essen heute.

When früh is used as an adjective directly before a noun, it can take endings:

• die frühe Stunde (the early hour)
• in den frühen Morgenstunden (in the early morning hours)

But in the sentence Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall, it’s an adverb, so it stays simply früh.

Why is everything like Bauer, Stall, Kühe, Wiese capitalized?

In German, all nouns are capitalized, regardless of where they appear in the sentence.

In this sentence:

• Bauer – noun (farmer)
• Stall – noun (stable)
• Kühe – noun (cows)
• Wiese – noun (meadow)

That’s why they all start with a capital letter.
Words like der, die, früh, gehen, können, damit, auf are not nouns, so they are written with lowercase letters (except at the very beginning of a sentence).

Can I start the sentence with the damit-clause, like: Damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können, öffnet der Bauer früh den Stall?

Yes, that is perfectly correct and quite natural:

• Damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können, öffnet der Bauer früh den Stall.

When you move the subordinate clause to the front, the main clause must still keep its verb in 2nd position:

• Damit die Kühe auf die Wiese gehen können, ← entire subordinate clause = position 1
• öffnet ← main-clause verb in position 2
• der Bauer früh den Stall.

Meaning and grammar stay the same; only the emphasis changes slightly.
Starting with the damit-clause puts more focus on the purpose: the reason why he opens the stable early.

Could I also say Der Bauer macht früh den Stall auf instead of öffnet früh den Stall?

Yes, that’s possible and idiomatic:

• Der Bauer öffnet früh den Stall.
• Der Bauer macht früh den Stall auf.

Differences:

• öffnen – slightly more neutral or formal verb for “to open”.
• aufmachen – separable verb, often more colloquial in everyday speech.

Both sentences are grammatically correct and mean essentially the same thing.
In writing or in more formal contexts, öffnen is often preferred; in everyday spoken German, aufmachen is very common.