I was watching Easy German (13) on youtube. Near 24 second, there is a statement

(Watching a boots)

und sie sind innen gefüttert hat mit einem Fell.

Is this a grammatically correct statement? I know the meaning.

I thought either

und sie sind innen mit einem Fell gefüttert.


und sie sind innen gefüttert worden mit einem Fell.

is natural. I just want to know if it's gramatically correct(allowed) seen by native Germans.

  • 1
    If you read the video's description, there is a section with corrections. Funnily enough, Google's auto-generated subtitles (CC) get it right. The machines are taking over!
    – David Vogt
    Apr 20 at 14:46
  • @David Vogt, Hi I know the meaning. I modified my question. Thanks!
    – Chan Kim
    Apr 20 at 15:10
  • Just two small remarks: (1) The pronoun sie is only capitalized for the polite address form ('you'), but not when it means 'she' or 'they' like here. (2) The second sentence should read sie sind innen gefüttert worden (instead of wurden) because wurden is a preterite form of werden, while worden is the auxiliary form of its participle perfect (otherwise geworden). Apr 20 at 15:16
  • Link for future reference. Also, people, even German speakers, misspeak sometimes, so it's best not to let individual sentences worry you too much if they're unscripted as this appears to be.
    – RDBury
    Apr 20 at 20:52

It's just an error in the subtitles of the video.

In the audio, the moderator (correctly) says:

...und sie sind innen gefüttert mit einem Fell.

The subtitles have the additional (incorrect) word "hat". There's a correction notice in the video description on YouTube.

The versions you propose in the question are also correct and natural. "Gefüttert" is used as an adjective in the original sentence, which denotes a quality of the shoes. If you use "gefüttert worden" instead, you use the passive voice of "füttern", which is also possible but has more emphasis on füttern as an action that was part of making the shoes.

  • Thank you for the clear explanation!
    – Chan Kim
    Apr 21 at 0:14
  • “Gefüttert worden” puts emphasis on the process of inserting the filling. Just “gefüttert” emphasises that the filling is there.
    – gnasher729
    Apr 26 at 6:15

No, it's not grammatically correct.

The main error is the word »hat« that doesn't make any sense here. It is unnecessary and wrong in this sentence. The solution is just to omit it:

und sie sind innen gefüttert mit einem Fell.

The next issue is the beginning of the sentence. Either this is just a fragment of a sentence, in which case you better should have posted the complete sentence, or you have to write the word »und« with an uppercase first letter, or you omit the conjunction that doesn't connect anything. So, ...

... either you write something like this:

Das sind schöne Stiefel, und sie sind innen gefüttert mit einem Fell.

... or you use an uppercase letter at the beginning of a sentence:

Und sie sind innen gefüttert mit einem Fell.

... or you write it without the needless conjunction »und« (and again use an uppercase letter at the beginning of a sentence):

Sie sind innen gefüttert mit einem Fell.

Next issue:
»Fell« (fur) is not meant as the haired skin of one animal, but as a material, like cotton or wool or plastic. And materials are uncountable in German (as they are in English too). And this means you should use them without an article:

Sie sind innen gefüttert mit Fell.

Next issue:
The predicate consists of two verbs:

  • sind
    This is an auxiliary verb that exists in the sentence just for grammatical reasons.
  • gefüttert
    This is a participle of a full verb. It carries the meaning.

Both verbs build a grammatical unit that is called »Verbklammer« in German (verb bracket). The name »Klammer« (bracket) already says how to use it: The two parts embrace all of the sentence, except position 1. And this means, that »gefüttert« better should move to the very end of the sentence:

Sie sind innen mit Fell gefüttert.

Now your sentence is grammatically perfectly correct.

You can have parts of speech outside the Verbklammer, in the »Nachfeld« (post field or trailing field), but it's not the normal way to construct sentences.

»gefüttert worden«

In your second suggestion you used the word »worden«. This is not a good choice, because the word »füttern« can mean to line, but this is a secondary meaning of füttern. The main meaning is to feed (like feeding an animal with food). And what comes first in the listeners mind when they read or hear the sentence is this:

Sie sind innen mit Fell gefüttert.
They are lined with fur inside.

Sie sind innen mit Fell gefüttert worden.
They hav been fed with fur inside.

Of coarse this other meaning also exists:

Sie sind innen mit Fell gefüttert worden.
They hav been lined with fur inside.

But this still is not what you normally would want to say, because when you say it this way, you talk about an action in the past (»Vorgangspassiv«). But when you look at boots, you normally want to talk about a state in the present (»Zustandspassiv«), so don't use worden here.

  • Hat (which does not appear in the audio and is explicitly listed as an error in the video's description) is the only mistake in the original sentence. Therefore, this answer is misleading. I don't see the purpose of removing the article from the mass noun and reversing the extraposition, as the sentence is perfectly natural as it is. Finally, the spelling of und does not have anything to do with grammatical correctness.
    – David Vogt
    Apr 20 at 18:04
  • thanks for the answer. I think I was aware of all other aspects you explained. I was just curious about that 'hat'. BTW, it sounds like the moderator had inserted 'hat' to me.
    – Chan Kim
    Apr 21 at 0:51
  • I listened to it again, now it sounds correctly (sie sind innen gefüttert).
    – Chan Kim
    Apr 21 at 14:27
  • 1
    @ChanKim: "gefüttert" does sound like "gefütthat" in Cari's northern German pronunciation, so it's easy to mishear.
    – HalvarF
    Apr 21 at 18:47

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.