Learn Hardcore German: Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen. - Nobody is allowed to come in here without an ID.

German word order is more flexible than English. Putting Niemand (nobody) at the beginning emphasizes who is affected: Nobody is allowed in.

The core word order is:

Niemand (subject)
darf (conjugated verb in 2nd position)
ohne Ausweis (adverbial phrase)
hier (adverb of place)
hereinkommen (infinitive at the end)

If you started with the verb, like Darf niemand ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen?, it would be a question (“Is nobody allowed to come in here without ID?”). In statements, German normally keeps the finite verb in 2nd position, so starting with Niemand is natural and correct.

What is the function of darf here, and how is it different from kann?

Darf is the 3rd person singular of dürfen, a modal verb that expresses permission (or lack of it).

dürfen ≈ to be allowed to / may
können ≈ to be able to / can (ability, possibility)

So:

Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
→ Nobody is allowed to come in here without ID.

If you said:

Niemand kann ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
→ Nobody can come in here without ID.

This would usually imply impossibility (e.g. there is a machine that physically blocks you), not just a rule. The original sentence states a rule/permission, so darf is the right choice.

Why is there no nicht or any other explicit negation in the sentence?

The negation is already contained in Niemand.

jemand = someone
niemand = no one / nobody

Because Niemand is inherently negative, you must not add nicht:

✅ Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
❌ Niemand darf nicht ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen. (This would sound like a double negation and is incorrect in standard German.)

So, the sentence is already negative because the subject is Niemand (nobody).

What is the difference between Niemand and Keiner / keine / kein?

They are all related to “no one / nobody / no …”, but they behave differently:

Niemand = nobody, no one
- Indeclinable in modern standard German (no gender, no plural forms in normal use).
- Used only for people as a pronoun:
  - Niemand ist hier. – Nobody is here.
kein / keine / keinen … = no / not any
- Declines like the indefinite article (ein/eine) and can be:
  - a determiner before a noun:
    Kein Mensch darf ohne Ausweis hereinkommen. – No person may enter without ID.
  - or a pronoun on its own in some contexts: Keiner darf ohne Ausweis hereinkommen.

In your sentence, Niemand is a very natural choice because you are talking about people in general, and it’s a clear, neutral pronoun.

Why is it ohne Ausweis and not something like ohne einen Ausweis?

Ohne always takes the accusative case, so Ausweis is in the accusative:

Nominative: der Ausweis
Accusative: den Ausweis → after ohne, you drop the article here and just say ohne Ausweis.

German frequently omits the article when you talk about the general requirement for something, especially with abstract or uncounted ideas like:

ohne Ausweis – without (an) ID
ohne Führerschein – without (a) driving licence
ohne Ticket – without (a) ticket

You could say ohne einen Ausweis, but it sounds more specific, like “without one (particular) ID”. The idiomatic, rule-like formulation usually drops the article: ohne Ausweis.

Why is Ausweis capitalized?

In German, all nouns are capitalized.

Ausweis is a noun meaning ID / identity card / pass. Therefore it must start with a capital letter:

✅ Ausweis
❌ ausweis

Capitalization is not about importance; it’s about word class (nouns).

What does hereinkommen mean exactly, and how is it different from kommen or reinkommen?

Hereinkommen is a verb made of:

hier / her- (direction towards the speaker)
-ein (in, inside)
kommen (to come)

So hereinkommen means “to come in (to where the speaker is)”.

Compare:

kommen – to come (general)
hereinkommen – to come in (into this room/space where I am)
reinkommen – colloquial contraction of hereinkommen (common in speech)
hineinkommen – similar idea, but hin- usually indicates movement away from the speaker’s position; often used in more descriptive or narrative contexts.

In doors / entry contexts, you’ll most commonly hear:

Komm (bitte) rein! (colloquial)
Kommen Sie bitte herein! (more polite / standard)

In your sentence, hereinkommen fits well as a neutral, standard form: “to come in here”.

Isn’t hier hereinkommen redundant, since herein already has “here” in it?

It can feel redundant to an English speaker, but in German it’s natural and not wrong.

hier – here (location)
hereinkommen – to come in (towards here)

Hier hereinkommen emphasizes both:

Where the rule applies (hier = this specific place/area), and
What kind of movement is meant (hereinkommen = entering).

Without hier, the sentence is still grammatically correct:

Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hereinkommen.

That would mean “Nobody may come in without ID”, but in a more general sense. Adding hier stresses that this place / this entrance is meant:

Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
→ Nobody may come in here without ID.

Where does darf have to go in the sentence, and why is hereinkommen at the end?

German main clauses follow two key rules:

The finite verb (conjugated verb) is in 2nd position.
Other verb parts (infinitives, participles, separable prefixes) go to the end.

In your sentence:

Niemand – element 1 (subject)
darf – conjugated verb in 2nd position
ohne Ausweis hier – middle field (adverbials)
hereinkommen – infinitive at the end

So the structure is:

[Niemand] [darf] [ohne Ausweis hier] [hereinkommen].

Because dürfen is a modal verb, the main action verb (hereinkommen) must appear as an infinitive at the end of the clause.

Could the word order be Niemand darf hier ohne Ausweis hereinkommen? Is that still correct?

Yes, that is also correct:

Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
Niemand darf hier ohne Ausweis hereinkommen.

Both sound natural. The difference is subtle and mostly about rhythm and slight emphasis:

ohne Ausweis hier (original): mild focus on the condition first (without ID), then the location.
hier ohne Ausweis: mild focus on this location first, then the condition.

In everyday language, both orders are used. There is no change of basic meaning.

What case is Ausweis in, and why?

Ausweis is in the accusative case because the preposition ohne always takes the accusative.

German has some prepositions that always demand a specific case. For example:

ohne (without) → accusative
- ohne Ausweis, ohne Führerschein, ohne Geld
mit (with) → dative
- mit dem Ausweis, mit dem Führerschein, mit dem Geld

So the case here is chosen not by the verb, but by the preposition ohne.

How would this sentence change in the past or future tense?

The modal verb dürfen changes form, but the structure with two verbs (modal + infinitive at the end) stays.

Present (given):

Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
– Nobody is allowed to come in here without ID.

Simple past (Präteritum):

Niemand durfte ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen.
– Nobody was allowed to come in here without ID.

Future (Futur I):

Niemand wird ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen dürfen.
– Nobody will be allowed to come in here without ID.

Note that in the future tense with a modal verb, dürfen becomes an infinitive and moves to the very end.

Is Niemand darf ohne Ausweis hier hereinkommen formal, informal, or neutral in tone?

The sentence is neutral and suitable for formal contexts (e.g. signs, regulations) because:

It uses standard vocabulary (Niemand, darf, Ausweis, hereinkommen).
It has no colloquial contractions (like reinkommen).

On a door sign, this is exactly the style you’d expect. In casual speech, someone might say something like:

Ohne Ausweis kommt hier keiner rein.
(“Without ID, nobody gets in here.” – more colloquial)