In a test I found the phrase

Sie ist voller Licht

which meant (it was said) she is full of light. I do not undestand voller in this context. Pons says it is an Inv. adj., which, in fact, adds to my confusion. Langenscheidt writes voll(er) with no indication about the use or not of the er ending.

1 Answer 1


Voll(er) in this case means "voll von" (full of). The -er is entirely optional, "Sie ist voll Licht" und "Sie ist voller Licht" are identical in meaning. Thus the lack of indication in the Langenscheidt, there is no rule. In this specific case, "voller Licht" is used because "voll Licht" is hard to pronounce because of the adjacent-but-distinct "l"-sounds.

According to both me and the Duden, it's a preposition.

  • 3
    Präposition klingt in der Tat am sinnvollsten. Es gibt eine sehr eingehende linguistische Untersuchung des Wortes, die zu dem Schluss kommt, dass es ein Unikat ist... auf jeden Fall lesenswert (sind nur Slides, also kein Volltext :) @EnriqueVasini ... linguistik.hu-berlin.de/institut/professuren/korpuslinguistik/…
    – Emanuel
    Apr 20, 2015 at 10:54
  • Danke, das war interessant!
    – adhominem
    Apr 21, 2015 at 7:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.