Learn Hardcore German: Im Großraumbüro will ich nicht in Panik geraten, wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert. - In the open‑plan office I don’t want to panic when the computer suddenly doesn’t work.

Ich will im Großraumbüro …
– first position: Ich
– verb (2nd): will
Im Großraumbüro will ich …
– first position: Im Großraumbüro (a prepositional phrase)
– verb (2nd): will
– subject comes after the verb: ich

Starting with Im Großraumbüro emphasizes the location (“In the open-plan office, I don’t want to panic…”), which sounds natural in German when you’re setting the scene.

What exactly does Im mean here, and why not in dem Großraumbüro?

Im is the contracted form of in dem.

in is the preposition.
dem is the dative singular article for masculine or neuter nouns.

Großraumbüro is neuter (das Großraumbüro), so its dative form is dem Großraumbüro.

In spoken and written German, in dem is very often contracted to im:

in dem Haus → im Haus
in dem Großraumbüro → im Großraumbüro

Both in dem Großraumbüro and Im Großraumbüro are grammatically correct; the contracted form is just more natural.

What does Großraumbüro mean exactly, and why is it one long word?

Großraumbüro is a compound noun:

groß = big, large
Raum = room, space
Büro = office

Together, Großraumbüro means something like large open-plan office, an office space where many people work in one big room instead of separate offices.

German very often glues nouns together to form compounds instead of using several separate words. Since it’s a noun, it is capitalized: Großraumbüro.

Grammatically:

Gender: neuter → das Großraumbüro
Plural: die Großraumbüros (or sometimes -büros with an umlautless plural, depending on style).

Why is will used here? I thought will in German means want, not will (future) like in English.

In German, will is the present tense of wollen, which expresses a want, intention, or firm decision, not the future tense.

So ich will = I want to / I intend to, not I will (future).

In the sentence:

Im Großraumbüro will ich nicht in Panik geraten …
→ In the open-plan office, I (firmly) do not want to panic …
→ or: I’m determined not to panic …

The future meaning in the whole sentence comes more from context (“when the computer suddenly stops working”) rather than from a future tense form. German often uses the present tense with wenn-clauses to talk about future events.

If you used Ich werde nicht in Panik geraten, that would sound like “I will not panic” in a more explicit future sense, but ich will nicht focuses more on your intention / willpower.

What is the difference between will and möchte here? Could I say Im Großraumbüro möchte ich nicht in Panik geraten …?

You can say that, and it’s correct, but there is a nuance:

ich will = I want to / I intend to / I’m determined to (stronger, more decisive)
ich möchte = I would like to (more polite, softer, more tentative)

So:

Im Großraumbüro will ich nicht in Panik geraten …
→ “I do not want to panic in the open-plan office…” (sounds more like a clear decision, maybe like a goal for yourself)
Im Großraumbüro möchte ich nicht in Panik geraten …
→ “I would not like to panic …” (sounds a bit softer or more wish-like)

Both are fine; will is a bit more direct and determined.

What does the expression in Panik geraten mean, and why is geraten used instead of a simpler verb?

In Panik geraten is an idiomatic expression meaning to panic / to get into a panic.

Panik = panic
in Panik (accusative) = into a state of panic
geraten = to get into, to end up in (some state or situation), often suddenly or unintentionally

So literally: to get into panic.

Why geraten?

geraten is often used with in + accusative to describe accidentally or suddenly getting into a situation:
- in Schwierigkeiten geraten = to get into trouble
- in Streit geraten = to get into an argument
- in Vergessenheit geraten = to fall into oblivion

You could use other expressions like panisch werden or anfangen zu paniken (colloquial), but in Panik geraten is the most idiomatic and standard phrase.

Why is it in Panik (accusative) and not in Panik (dative)? How do I know which case in takes here?

The preposition in can take either dative or accusative:

dative: location (where something is)
accusative: direction / change (where something goes / moves into)

In this sentence:

in Panik geraten describes a change of state (you go from calm to panic), so it is directional in an abstract sense: you are moving into panic.
Therefore, in takes the accusative: in Panik.

Compare:

Ich bin in Panik. (I am in a state of panic. → location/state → dative, but Panik has the same form in dative singular)
Ich gerate in Panik. (I get into a state of panic. → change into → accusative)

With other nouns the difference is clearer:

Ich bin im Büro. (dative: in dem Büro → fixed location)
Ich gehe ins Büro. (accusative: in das Büro → direction / going into).

Why is nicht placed before in Panik geraten and not at the very end of the clause?

In German, nicht generally comes before the part of the sentence it negates.

Here, the whole infinitive phrase in Panik geraten is what is being negated:

will ich nicht in Panik geraten
→ ich will nicht [in Panik geraten]

You are negating the action of getting into panic, not the entire sentence in some broader sense. Some patterns:

Negating the infinitive verb phrase:
- Ich will nicht arbeiten.
- Ich will nicht in Panik geraten.
Negating an object:
- Ich will den Computer nicht benutzen. (I don’t want to use the computer.)
  → nicht precedes den Computer.

Putting nicht at the very end (… will ich in Panik geraten nicht) would be wrong and unidiomatic. The correct spot here is directly before the infinitive phrase.

What does wenn express in wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert? Is it more like if or when?

Wenn can mean both if and when, depending on context.

In this sentence, it describes a repeated or possible condition in the future:

wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert
→ when(ever) the computer suddenly doesn’t work
→ also understandable as if the computer suddenly doesn’t work

Because this is a general situation that may happen from time to time, English can use either when or if, but when-in-the-sense-of-“whenever this happens” is often more natural.

Compare:

Wenn ich Zeit habe, rufe ich dich an.
→ “When(ever) I have time, I’ll call you.”

If you wanted a more strictly hypothetical or uncertain condition, you could also use falls (= in case / if), but wenn is neutral and very common.

Why is the verb at the end in the wenn-clause: wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert?

Wenn introduces a subordinate clause (Nebensatz). In German subordinate clauses, the conjugated verb goes to the final position.

So the structure is:

wenn
- subject + other elements + finite verb (at the end)

In your sentence:

wenn = subordinator
der Computer = subject
plötzlich = adverb
nicht = negation
funktioniert = finite verb at the very end

Hence: wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert

In contrast, a main clause has the conjugated verb in second position:

Der Computer funktioniert plötzlich nicht.

Why is it der Computer? I thought many nouns referring to devices were das.

German noun gender is mostly arbitrary and must be learned with each noun. For Computer:

Gender: masculine → der Computer
Plural: die Computer

Some similar nouns:

der Computer
der Laptop
der Drucker (printer)
der Fernseher (TV set)

There are also neuter device nouns like das Handy, das Tablet, das Radio. There is no reliable rule for gender based on meaning here; you simply have to remember der Computer.

Why is funktioniert in the present tense if the sentence talks about a future situation?

German frequently uses the present tense to talk about future events, especially in wenn-clauses (and other time/condition clauses).

So:

wenn der Computer plötzlich nicht funktioniert
literally: “when the computer suddenly does not work”
but in context: “when the computer suddenly stops working / doesn’t work (in the future)”

You only need the future tense wird … funktionieren in German when you really want to emphasize the future or avoid ambiguity. In most everyday speech and writing, the simple present is enough to express future time when the context or a time word (morgen, bald, später) makes it clear.