Learn Hardcore German: Meine Schwiegermutter lacht und zeigt mir, wie man die Schraube richtig hält und mit dem Hammer trifft. - My mother-in-law laughs and shows me how to hold the screw correctly and hit it with the hammer.

Schwiegermutter (mother‑in‑law) is grammatically feminine, and here it is the subject of the sentence, so it must be in the nominative case.

The possessive determiner mein- declines like the indefinite article:

feminine nominative: meine Schwiegermutter → my mother‑in‑law (as subject)
feminine dative/genitive: meiner Schwiegermutter

Because Schwiegermutter is doing the action (laughs and shows me), it has to be nominative, so meine is correct.

Meiner Schwiegermutter would be something like “to my mother‑in‑law” or “of my mother‑in‑law,” which doesn’t fit the role in this sentence.

Why is it zeigt mir and not zeigt mich?

The verb zeigen works like English “to show (someone) something”:

jemandem etwas zeigen → to show someone something
- jemandem = dative (“to someone”)
- etwas = accusative (“something”)

In the sentence:

mir = to me (dative)
what she is showing is the whole clause: wie man die Schraube richtig hält und mit dem Hammer trifft (“how to hold the screw correctly and hit it with the hammer”) → that is the accusative object.

So the pattern is:
Sie zeigt mir, wie … = She shows me how …

Mich would be accusative (“me” as the direct object), which would mean she shows me (as in “she presents me”), not she shows me something.

What exactly is the structure zeigt mir, wie …? Is wie … a kind of object?

Yes. The clause starting with wie is a subordinate clause that functions as the direct object of zeigt.

Pattern:

jemandem zeigen, wie … = to show someone how …

So in your sentence:

Main clause: Meine Schwiegermutter lacht und zeigt mir
Object clause: wie man die Schraube richtig hält und mit dem Hammer trifft.

Grammatically, the whole “wie”-clause answers the question “shows me what?” → “shows me how …”, so it is the thing being shown.

Why is it man (wie man die Schraube richtig hält) and not du or ich?

German man is an indefinite pronoun, similar to English “one,” “you,” “people,” “they” in a general sense.

wie man … macht → “how one/you (in general) does …”

It is used:

for general instructions:
- So macht man das. = That’s how you do it / one does it.
for impersonal statements:
- Man sagt, dass … = They say that …

If the mother‑in‑law said:

… wie du die Schraube richtig hältst …
→ very directly addressed to you personally.

Using man makes it sound more like a general rule or general technique, not just “your own way.”

Why is there a comma before wie?

In German, a comma is mandatory before most subordinate clauses, including those introduced by wie when it means “how” and introduces a full clause, not just a short comparison.

Sie zeigt mir, wie man das macht. ✔
Er erklärt mir, wie ich fahren soll. ✔

Here, wie man die Schraube richtig hält und mit dem Hammer trifft is a full subordinate clause, so it must be separated with a comma from the main clause Meine Schwiegermutter lacht und zeigt mir.

Why are the verbs at the end in wie man die Schraube richtig hält und mit dem Hammer trifft?

Because wie … introduces a subordinate clause, and in normal German word order, the finite verb in a subordinate clause goes to the end.

Breakdown:

Subordinate conjunction: wie
Subject: man
Object: die Schraube
Adverb: richtig
Verb: hält

→ wie man die Schraube richtig hält

Then there’s a coordinated second predicate:

(wie man) … mit dem Hammer trifft

The verbs hält and trifft are both in final position in their part of the clause, which is correct in subordinate clauses.

Why is there no sie after trifft? Should it be … und sie mit dem Hammer trifft?

The accusative object die Schraube is shared by both verbs:

hält (die Schraube)
trifft (die Schraube)

German often omits repeated elements if they’re obvious:

Er nimmt die Tasse und stellt (sie) auf den Tisch.
→ The sie is optional.

So:

… wie man die Schraube richtig hält und (die Schraube) mit dem Hammer trifft.

You could say:

… und sie mit dem Hammer trifft.

That is grammatically fine, but omitting sie is very natural here and avoids redundancy.

Why is it mit dem Hammer and not mit den Hammer?

The preposition mit always takes the dative case.

der Hammer (masculine nominative singular)
→ dative singular: dem Hammer

So:

mit dem Hammer = with the hammer ✔
mit den Hammer would be wrong here.

den is masculine accusative singular or dative plural, but mit requires dative, and you only have one hammer, so it must be dem.

Does trifft here mean “meets” or “hits”? How does treffen work?

The verb treffen has two common meanings, depending on context:

to meet someone:
- Ich treffe meine Freunde. = I’m meeting my friends.
to hit/strike something or someone (accurately):
- Er trifft den Ball. = He hits the ball.
- Sie trifft die Flasche mit einem Stein. = She hits the bottle with a stone.

In your sentence:

mit dem Hammer trifft
clearly uses the “to hit” meaning:
“…and (how to) hit it with the hammer.”

When used with an instrument phrase like mit dem Hammer, treffen almost always means “to hit”, not “to meet.”

Why is richtig before hält? Could it go somewhere else?

richtig here is an adverb meaning “correctly / properly”.

Adverbs in German often come before the verb they modify, especially with simple verbs:

Er fährt schnell. = He drives fast.
Sie arbeitet hart. = She works hard.
man … die Schraube richtig hält = one holds the screw correctly.

You could say:

wie man die Schraube richtig hält (most natural)
Less natural or different emphasis would be:
wie man die Schraube hält, und zwar richtig (stronger emphasis on correctly, slightly more spoken/colloquial)
wie man richtig die Schraube hält (possible, but sounds a bit marked; normally you’d say it as in the original.)

So the given position of richtig is the normal and most idiomatic one.

Does lacht mean she’s laughing at me?

On its own, lachen just means “to laugh”, without specifying at whom or at what.

Meine Schwiegermutter lacht.
= My mother‑in‑law laughs / is laughing.

If you want to make “laugh at someone” explicit, you normally say:

über jemanden lachen
- Sie lacht über mich. = She’s laughing at me.
or jemanden auslachen (stronger, more mocking)
- Sie lacht mich aus. = She’s making fun of me / laughing at me.

Because the sentence just says lacht, we only know she’s laughing; it could be friendly, amused, or possibly at the situation, not necessarily at you personally. Context would decide, but grammatically lacht alone does not automatically mean “laughs at me.”