While in abstract level we have a subject, i. e. a person with an opinion concerning some object, in German the respective cases depend only on the specific verb used, overshadowing this generic situation:
Wie hat Dir (dative) der Film (nominative) gefallen?
Was hältst Du (nominative) von dem Film (dative)?
Magst Du (nominative) den Film (accusative)?
The problem is that the Englich verb "to like" and the German verb "gefallen" work in different ways:
I like you.
Du gefällst mir.
There is one item that is attracting. I call it the attractor. The other item is attracted by the attractor, I call it the fan.
In the English version you find the fan in the active position of the subject. The fan is ...
Der Film hat dir gefallen.
Der Film is subject. (nominative)
Now make it a question:
Hat dir der Film gefallen?
English questions don't work in regard of finding the right case in German. The question
(Wer oder) was hat dir gefallen?
would indicate nominative and its equivalent in English would be something like
What was to your liking.
This can only be answered in context, as -- see Carsten's answer -- the names are not marked for case.
If the previous sentence was something along the lines of "Peter traf seine alten Schulfreunde nach langer Zeit wieder", then Peter would normally be interpreted as the theme, or topic. In this sentence some information (rheme or comment) is given about ...
In einem nicht weiter spezifizierten Kontext wäre das normale ("by default") Verständnis des Satzes Natascha hat Peter früher gut gefallen nach meinem Sprachempfinden:
(Wer:) Natascha hat (wem:) Peter früher gut gefallen.
wobei der aktive Part (das logische Subjekt) Peter ist. Man kann den Sachverhalt aktivisch auch ausdrücken als
(Wer:) Peter hat (...
The problem in analysing the sentence is that in modern German proper names are not inflected and we therefore cannot tell the cases by looking at them in isolation. Let us replace the names by personal pronouns to make the cases clear.
This can be either
Sie hat ihm gefallen.
in which case he liked her (see also this question), or
Ihr hat er ...
The first sentence does not answer “To whom did the flight cost 5000 euros?”, that’s a question in a different language. It answers „Wen hat der Flug 5000 Euro gekostet?“ That kosten and lehren take two accusative objects is exceptional, that’s why the book mentions them. But it is like it is.
The concept of direct and indirect object doesn't really work in German. If you want to ask for accusative, the question is wen oder was.
Der Flug hat wen 5000 Euro gekostet? Meinen Vater.
Der Flug hat meinen Vater was gekostet? 5000 Euro.
Same for lehren:
Sie hat wen Deutsch gelehrt? Mich.
Sie hat mich was gelehrt? Deutsch.
Usually that ...
Please note that the rules for the use of interpunction in German are often very different from those in English. Unfortunately, they are also pretty difficult - or say complicated becaue there are so many different situations.
For example, you would not put a comma after Zum Beispiel in German like here after for example. Generally speaking,...
I suppose you mean something like:
sich gönnen (reflexive verb), plus an object: sich eine Banane gönnen (Banane is Akkusativ) -->
Ich werde mir eine Banane gönnen.
where mir is Dativ. Right?
Your sample sentence doesn't work like that because sich bewerben does not allow for an accusative object, it uses a prepositional object instead. That the ...
ein does not belong to the head noun, which would regularly appear without article in the indefinite plural anyway: "Ich habe Fragen".
We do see inflection e.g for "kein-e weiter-en Fragen", so we conclude that uninflected ein does not fit and must belong to ein paar instead.
ein paar is never inflected. Nevertheless, we see deine paar with ...
Das Paar is a noun and therefore the article is declined as in
ein Paar (nominative)
eines Paares (genitive)
einem Paar (dative)
ein Paar (accusative).
Ein paar in ein paar Fragen however is a fixed expression. Therein ein isn't an indefinite article but just a part
of the expression like in
ein paar Fragen (some questions)
There is the noun "ein Paar", which means two associated humans or objects (das glückliche Paar = the happy couple, die Paar Schuhe = the pair of shoes)
and there is the pronoun "paar" which means some or few and which is often combined as a fixed expression as "ein paar".
alle paar Wochen = every few weeks
ein paar Menschen = some ...
Because all noun phrases with a temporal meaning appear in the accusative.
Könntest du einen Augenblick auf das Kind aufpassen?
Er geht jeden Abend ins Fitnessstudio.
Du würdest diese Arbeit keinen Tag aushalten.
Sie sieht so aus, als würde sie sich jeden Moment übergeben.
(The last phrase has the idiomatic meaning of soon.)
There are lots of rules of thumb, but they kind of fall apart when it comes to prepositions. There are effectively different rules with when to use which case with prepositions. Some only take dative, some only take accusative. With the ones that can take either, generally accusative is used when there is movement relative to the object, dative when there is ...
Man könnte von einem temporalen Akkusativ sprechen.
Zeitangaben ohne Präposition stehen üblicherweise im Akkusativ:
Nächste Woche kann ich nicht.
Diesen Freitag gehe ich ins Kino.
Mit Präposition wird dagegen der Dativ verwendet:
In der nächsten Woche kann ich nicht.
An diesem Freitag gehe ich ins Kino.
Regarding the sentence
Wen nannte man den eisernen Kanzler?
Wen is used to ask for a direct object (accusative), but it looks to me in this example that the question is referred to the subject of the sentence, that is who is the person doing the action of calling himself the Iron Chancellor.
Which is incorrect. The question is not about who ...
Check out the following simple Phrase:
"Peter liebt den Hund."
If you wanted to know, who loves the dog, you would simply ask:
WER liebt den Hund? (Peter liebt den Hund. (wer -> nominative))
But if you wanted to know, whom Peter loves, you would ask:
Peter liebt WEN? (Peter liebt den Hund. (Here reflects the accusative in the question.))
If you ...
I'd argue your misunderstanding is indeed centered around your confusion about "man": In
Wen nannte man den eisernen Kanzler?
"man" is actually the subject. Your attempt to write a long answer instinctively came out right:
Man nannte Otto den eisernen Kanzler.
Here, it becomes clearer how "man" actually has the role of the subject in the sentence.
The problem is unrelated to the impersonal man, it is simply the phrase, because jemanden etwas nennen see DWDS in the meaning jmdn als etwas bezeichnen requires two accusative objects, the person/thing to be labeled and the label itself.
Ich nenne dich einen Betrüger.
It's a double accusative.
Man has nothing to do with it. Rather, it can be used with certain verbs. Among them is
jemanden etwas nennen.
It's actually similar in English, altough you don't notice cases. Consider this:
Peter nannte den Akrobaten einen Schlangenmenschen.
Peter called the acrobat a contortionist.
Maybe rephrasing it in the ...
Learners of German should avoid the terms direct object and indirect object as they often are a source of confusion. (Your question being a good example, by the way)
A transitive Verb in German is a verb which takes an accusative object.
An intransitive Verb is a Verb which does not take an accusative object. It may take an object in another case (often ...
I want to add that the rule is actually pretty reliable.
Even in this case, it holds that verfolgen is in accusative, since it receives the action of the verb, as you said.
However, the word folgen can have a slightly different meaning: Let's say you're invited, your host shows you the way to the living room and you follow him or her. So that's a thing you ...