Log inSign up

Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.
Sometimes watching TV is just a waste of time.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching German grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning German now

Questions & Answers about Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

What exactly does Fernsehen mean here? Is it “television” or “watching TV”?

In this sentence, Fernsehen means “watching TV / watching television” as an activity, not the physical device.

  • das Fernsehen = the medium or activity of watching TV
    • e.g. Fernsehen macht keinen Spaß mehr. – TV / watching TV is no fun anymore.
  • der Fernseher = the TV set, the device
    • e.g. Der Fernseher steht im Wohnzimmer. – The TV (set) is in the living room.

So Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung really means:
“Sometimes watching TV is just a waste of time.”

Why is Fernsehen capitalized? Isn’t it originally a verb?

Yes. The verb is fernsehen (to watch TV).

When you turn a verb into a noun in German, you:

  1. Put it in the infinitive form, and
  2. Capitalize it.

So:

  • fernsehen (verb) → das Fernsehen (noun: “(the) watching TV”)

This process is called Nominalisierung (nominalization). That’s why Fernsehen is capitalized here—it’s being used as a noun, the subject of the sentence.

Why is there no article before Fernsehen? Why not “Das Fernsehen ist nur Zeitverschwendung”?

Both are grammatically correct, but they sound a bit different:

  • Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

    • More general and abstract.
    • Treats Fernsehen like an activity in general, similar to English “Watching TV is sometimes just a waste of time.”

  • Manchmal ist das Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

    • Refers more concretely to TV as a medium, what’s on TV, TV programming.
    • Closer to “Sometimes television (as we know it) is just a waste of time.”

German often drops the article with abstract, general activities:

  • Rauchen ist ungesund. – Smoking is unhealthy.
  • Lesen macht Spaß. – Reading is fun.

So Fernsehen here behaves like Rauchen or Lesen.

What case are Fernsehen and Zeitverschwendung in, and why?

Both Fernsehen and Zeitverschwendung are in the nominative case.

Reason: the verb sein (ist) is a linking verb (copula). In German, the noun linked by sein stays in the nominative (this is called predicate nominative):

  • Fernsehen = the grammatical subject (What is sometimes only a waste of time?)
  • Zeitverschwendung = the predicative noun describing the subject

Pattern:

  • X ist Y. → both X and Y are nominative.

Compare:

  • Das Buch ist ein Geschenk. – Buch and Geschenk are both nominative.
  • Fernsehen ist Zeitverschwendung. – Both are nominative.
What does nur mean here, and what exactly does it modify?

Here nur means “just / only” in a downgrading or diminishing way:

  • nur Zeitverschwendung = “just a waste of time / nothing but a waste of time”

In this sentence, nur modifies Zeitverschwendung:

  • Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.
    = At times, TV doesn’t give you anything positive; it’s nothing more than a waste of time.

So the focus is: What is Fernsehen sometimes? Only a waste of time (and nothing more).

Could we move nur to a different position, and would that change the meaning?

Yes, moving nur changes the meaning quite a lot:

  1. Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

    • Meaning: Sometimes, TV is nothing more than a waste of time.
    • Focus is on Zeitverschwendung.

  2. Manchmal ist nur Fernsehen Zeitverschwendung.

    • Meaning: Sometimes, only TV is a waste of time (other things are not).
    • Now nur modifies Fernsehen.
    • Implication: Other activities are not a waste of time, but watching TV is.

So word order with nur is very important in German. Where you put it usually marks what exactly is “only”.

Why is there no article before Zeitverschwendung? Could I say “nur eine Zeitverschwendung”?

Both are possible, but there’s a nuance:

  • nur Zeitverschwendung

    • Very general, categorical statement.
    • Like English “just a waste of time” in a broad sense.

  • nur eine Zeitverschwendung

    • Feels a bit more specific or subjective, as if you’re judging it in a particular situation.
    • Closer to “just a (mere) waste of time”.

In generic, evaluative sentences with sein, German often omits the article:

  • Das ist Unsinn. – That’s nonsense.
  • Das ist Betrug. – That’s fraud.

So nur Zeitverschwendung is the most natural version here, but nur eine Zeitverschwendung is not wrong; it’s just slightly more emphatic or situational.

Can I change the word order to “Fernsehen ist manchmal nur Zeitverschwendung”?

Yes, that sentence is also correct:

  • Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.
  • Fernsehen ist manchmal nur Zeitverschwendung.

Both mean the same overall. The difference is one of emphasis and rhythm:

  • Starting with Manchmal emphasizes the time aspect (“There are times when…”).
  • Starting with Fernsehen emphasizes the topic (“As for TV, sometimes it’s just a waste of time”).

Both follow the German verb-second rule: in main clauses, the finite verb (ist) stays in the second position:

  • Manchmal (1) ist (2) Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung (3)
  • Fernsehen (1) ist (2) manchmal nur Zeitverschwendung (3)
What is the difference between manchmal, oft, and ab und zu? Could I use them here?

All three can fit here, but they differ in frequency and style:

  • manchmal = sometimes, occasionally

    • Neutral, very common.
    • Suggests it happens, but not regularly.

  • oft = often, frequently

    • Higher frequency than manchmal.
    • Oft ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung. = “Often, watching TV is just a waste of time.”

  • ab und zu = now and then, every once in a while

    • A bit more colloquial, slightly more relaxed in tone.
    • Ab und zu ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung.

So yes, you can replace manchmal with oft or ab und zu, but you change the implied how often this is true and, slightly, the tone.

Could I also say “Manchmal ist es nur Zeitverschwendung, fernzusehen”? Is that equivalent?

Yes, that’s also correct and very natural:

  • Manchmal ist es nur Zeitverschwendung, fernzusehen.
    = “Sometimes it’s just a waste of time to watch TV.”

Structure:

  • es = dummy subject
  • nur Zeitverschwendung = complement of ist
  • fernzusehen = infinitive clause explaining what is a waste of time

Meaning-wise, it’s almost the same as Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung, but:

  • Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung uses Fernsehen as a noun (the activity as a thing).
  • …es nur Zeitverschwendung, fernzusehen uses fernzusehen as a verb in an infinitive clause.

Both are very idiomatic; the choice is mostly stylistic.

Is Fernsehen always a noun, or can it be a verb too? How do I know which is which?

It can be both:

  • fernsehen (lowercase, one word) = verb

    • Wir sehen jeden Abend fern. – We watch TV every evening.
    • Infinitive: fernsehen
    • Conjugated: ich sehe fern, du siehst fern, er sieht fern, etc.

  • das Fernsehen (capitalized) = noun

    • Fernsehen ist teuer. – Watching TV is expensive.
    • The subject or object in a sentence, can take articles: das Fernsehen.

How to tell:

  • Capitalized and used like a thing → noun (das Fernsehen)
  • Lowercase and behaves like a verb (can be conjugated, can follow zu, etc.) → verb (fernsehen)
What is Zeitverschwendung exactly? How is it formed, and what gender is it?

Zeitverschwendung is a compound noun:

  • Zeit = time
  • Verschwendung = waste, squandering (from the verb verschwenden = to waste)

So Zeitverschwendung literally = “time waste,” i.e. waste of time.

Grammar:

  • Gender: die Zeitverschwendung (feminine)
  • Singular: die Zeitverschwendung
  • Plural: die Zeitverschwendungen (rare in actual use; people usually use it in the singular)

In the sentence Manchmal ist Fernsehen nur Zeitverschwendung, it appears without an article because it’s used in a general evaluative way with sein.