Learn Hardcore German: Nach dem langen Tag im Kindergarten isst unser Kind Nudeln und bekommt als Nachtisch genau einen Keks. - After the long day in kindergarten our child eats pasta and gets exactly one cookie for dessert.

Tag is masculine: der Tag (nominative).
Dative masculine singular of der is dem → dem Tag.
With an adjective, you also need a dative masculine ending on the adjective: lang → langen.

So you get: nach + dem + langen + Tag → nach dem langen Tag.

“Nach der lange Tag” is wrong twice:

der is nominative, but you need dative (dem).
lange is not the correct dative masculine adjective ending (langen is).

Why is it “im Kindergarten” and not “in den Kindergarten” or “in dem Kindergarten”?

There are two points here:

Meaning: location vs. movement
- in dem Kindergarten = in the kindergarten (location, dative)
- in den Kindergarten = into the kindergarten (movement/direction, accusative)
In this sentence, the child is in kindergarten (location), not going into it, so you need the dative: in dem Kindergarten.
Contraction
German often contracts in dem → im.
- in dem Kindergarten → im Kindergarten

So im Kindergarten is just the normal contracted form of in dem Kindergarten in the dative.

Why does the sentence start with “Nach dem langen Tag im Kindergarten” and not with the subject “Unser Kind”?

German has the verb-second rule: in a main clause, the finite verb must be in second position, but anything can be in first position (subject, time phrase, object, etc.).

Both are correct:

Nach dem langen Tag im Kindergarten isst unser Kind Nudeln …
Unser Kind isst nach dem langen Tag im Kindergarten Nudeln …

Putting the time phrase first (Nach dem langen Tag …) is just a stylistic choice. It’s common in German to put time expressions early in the sentence to set the scene.

The important rule:
Position 1: Nach dem langen Tag im Kindergarten (whole phrase counts as one “slot”)
Position 2: isst (verb)

Why is it “isst” and not something like “isset” or just “ess”?

The verb is essen (to eat), and it’s irregular in the present tense.

Conjugation (singular):

ich esse
du isst
er/sie/es isst

For unser Kind (3rd person singular), you must use isst.
“ess” doesn’t exist as a finite form, and “isset” is an old or dialectal form you don’t use in modern standard German.

What is the difference between “isst” and “ist”? They look almost the same.

isst = “eats” (from essen)
ist = “is” (from sein)

Spelling and pronunciation:

isst: short vowel, double s sound [ɪst], but clearly from essen in context.
ist: also [ɪst], but from sein.

You distinguish them by context, not by pronunciation in most accents:

Unser Kind isst Nudeln. = Our child eats pasta.
Unser Kind ist müde. = Our child is tired.

Why is it “unser Kind” and not “unseren Kind” or “unsere Kind”?

Unser Kind is the subject of the sentence, so it’s in the nominative case.

Kind is neuter: das Kind in nominative.
Possessive unser- behaves like an article and must match case and gender.

Nominative singular forms:

masculine: unser Mann
feminine: unsere Frau
neuter: unser Kind

So you need unser Kind (neuter nominative).

“unseren Kind” would be accusative/dative masculine, and Kind is not masculine.
“unsere Kind” would be for feminine/plural, but Kind (singular) is neuter.

Why is “Kind” neuter in German?

In German, grammatical gender is not always logical from an English perspective.

das Kind is neuter by convention.
This is true regardless of whether the child is a boy or a girl.

Some other words for children are also neuter:

das Baby
das Mädchen (even though it refers to a girl!)

So you must memorize das Kind as neuter and use forms like unser Kind, mit unserem Kind, etc.

Why is there no article before “Nudeln”? Why not “die Nudeln”?

In German, with plural or mass nouns in a general or indefinite sense, you can often omit the article, especially with food and drinks:

Er isst Nudeln. – He eats pasta / He’s eating pasta.
Sie trinkt Kaffee. – She drinks coffee.
Wir kaufen Äpfel. – We (are) buy(ing) apples.

If you say die Nudeln, you’re talking about specific pasta already known in the context:

Er isst die Nudeln. – He eats the (those) noodles/pasta (the particular ones we’ve mentioned).

In this sentence, it just means the child eats some pasta, not some specific known portion, so no article is natural: isst … Nudeln.

Why is it “Nudeln” and not just “Nudel”?

Nudel is normally used in the singular only when you mean one noodle (one piece):

eine Nudel – one noodle

When you refer to pasta as a dish, German usually uses the plural:

Nudeln essen – to eat pasta
Magst du Nudeln? – Do you like pasta?

So Nudeln here means “pasta” in general (a plate of noodles), not “several individual noodles” like English would suggest literally.

What does “bekommt” mean here, and how is it different from English “become”?

bekommen in German usually means “to get / to receive”, not “to become”.

Er bekommt einen Keks. – He gets a cookie.
Sie bekommt ein Geschenk. – She receives a present.

So bekommt als Nachtisch genau einen Keks = “(he/she) gets exactly one cookie as dessert.”

Be careful:

English to become = German werden
- Er wird müde. – He becomes / is getting tired.

bekommen and become are false friends.

Why is it “als Nachtisch” and not “als den Nachtisch” or “als ein Nachtisch”?

Here als means “as” in the sense of “in the role of / as a kind of”. In this use, German usually uses no article:

als Lehrer arbeiten – to work as a teacher
als Geschenk – as a present
als Nachtisch – as dessert

If you said als den Nachtisch, it would sound like you’re contrasting it with some other, very specific dessert; this is unusual and stylistically odd in this context. Als Nachtisch is the natural phrase for “as dessert”.

What is the function of “genau” in “genau einen Keks”?

Here genau means “exactly / precisely” and functions as an adverb modifying the number:

genau einen Keks – exactly one cookie
genau drei Minuten – exactly three minutes
genau diese Farbe – exactly this color

It does not mean “exact” as an adjective (like “an exact cookie” – that would be nonsense).
Word order: adverbs like genau usually come before the thing they modify: genau einen, genau drei, genau diese.

Why is it “einen Keks” and not “ein Keks”?

Keks is masculine: der Keks in the nominative.

Here, Keks is the direct object (“gets one cookie”), so it must be in the accusative case.

Masculine ein- words in the accusative take -en:

Nominative: ein Keks (as subject)
Accusative: einen Keks (as object)

So:

Ein Keks ist auf dem Teller. – A cookie is on the plate. (nominative)
Er bekommt einen Keks. – He gets a cookie. (accusative)

That’s why einen Keks is required here.

Why is there no comma before “und bekommt”?

In German, you do not put a comma before und when it simply joins two verbs with the same subject in one clause:

Unser Kind isst Nudeln und bekommt einen Keks.

The subject unser Kind applies to both verbs (isst and bekommt). This is one compound predicate, not two separate clauses, so no comma is used.

You would use a comma with und if it links two independent clauses, each with its own subject (or different structure), e.g.:

Unser Kind isst Nudeln, und wir trinken Kaffee.
(two clauses, two subjects → comma)