

Ich bin der Philipp.

Why "der"?


As mentioned in another answer, it is more common in the South to add the article whereas people in Northern Germany rather leave it out. I live in Western Germany and I use the article, too.

I want to add some further thoughts. I'll reuse the example for that purpose.

Das gehört dem Alex.

Suppose, there is a group of people with more than one person being called Alex and you point at one of them and say that sentence. By that, you kinda put emphasize on whom exactly it belongs.




Das gehört der Alex(andra).

In addition to that another excerpt:



  1. (Die) Diana vs (Die) Jana

  2. (Die) Diana vs (Die) Anna



Just for your information: In some regions female person are neuter ;p


| improve this answer | |
  • 2
  • 4
  • 2
  • 3



Das gehört Alex. Kommt Alex heute mit?


Das gehört dem Alex. Kommt der Alex heute mit?



| improve this answer | |






| improve this answer | |


As everyone has remarked, as far as informal speech is concerned, it is a matter of difference between North and South - where Southerners are the ones to add articles. Having lived in the South for the last 13 years, I have started to acquire it myself.

There can, however be little doubt, that German Standard German does not allow this usage, as I can not come up with any example where this was used in classic German literature. I will now start a search in the works of Austrian writers Zweig and Doderer, though Ingmar has already provided evidence of "extra" articles in works of other Austrian writers.


Several comments have shown people confuse this issue with articles in front of titles. This must be treated separately. For instance, it is totally acceptable, even in the North, to write:

Im Hause des Herrn Lunte wurde Sonntags stets Grütze gegessen.

Die Studienrätin Ludmilla, die Nichte des Herrn Rustikov und Tante des Johannis war eine strenge Frau, welche nichts mehr ergötzte, als die blanke Furcht ihrer Schüler.

Here "des Johannis" is preferred to avoid antiquated genitive forms such as "Johanisens". Through, I think, we should not drag the genitive into this. I believe it is always permitted to form it with des, just usually not preferred.

With titles, care has to be taken. In Standard German German you should observe, how strongly the title forms part of the name.

Ich kenne Herrn von Ilmenstein seit Jahren = I have known Lord Ilmenstein for years


Ich kenne den Herrn von Ilmenstein seit Jahren =I have known the lord (and Master) of Ilmenstein for years.

Said master may in fact not be Lord Ilmenstein, but rather an usurper named Björn Malte Mehring-Brunnendreck.

Furthermore, confusion has arisen in the comments concerning cases like ministers, prime ministers and so on. Since these are unique, when not followed by a name, they demand articles:

Der Aussenminister gab einen kurzen Bericht.

Additionally, we use articles in front of occupations to convey additional meaning:

Der Lehrer Strack wusste, wie mit ungezogenen Jungen zu verfahren war.

Der Physiker Dimpfelberger hatte keine Angst vor der Atomenergie.

These are variants of:

Dimpfelberger, ein Physiker, hatte keine Angst vor der Atomenergie.


EDIT: Ingmar has already provided examples of Austrian writers using the "extra" article. The clearest one is from a work of Jörg Mauthe "vom Thomas begleitet streife ich durch die Ruine...". Naturally, works that want to convey a particularly Austrian setting are full of this. For instance "Die Tante Jolesch" by Torberg.


Other answers have not yet highlighted the benefits of including the article for clarifying some ambiguous sentences. The sentence:

Der Tom hat den Richard geschubst, nicht den Martin

is unambiguous, however:

Tom hat Richard geschubst, nicht Martin ,

remains ambiguous!

That is not to strongly argue for the inclusion of the article, since the slightest syntactic awareness clarifies every misunderstanding, by opting for :

Tom hat Richard, nicht Martin, geschubst,


Tom, nicht Martin, hat Richard geschubst.

Bastian Stick points out the semantic difference between "Barbara" and "die Barbara", the latter being a specific one. While that is usually sufficiently clear by intonation, please refer to my earlier example, on the Lord of Ilmenstein, where no Intonation will save you. This obviously concerns marginal cases, so it's no big asset of standard usage either. A further example would be:

Frau Bartels = Mrs Bartels

die Frau Bartels = Bartels Frau

But here, luckily, intonation suffices to clarify the meaning of colloquial usage. "Frau" as a title is stressed very little. And, even in the North, "Bartels Frau" is the common genitive. You could, however, create such sentences for the joy of it:

Beständig drehte sich Bartel, welcher sich unbeobachtet wähnte, nach der attraktiven Frau Bartels um. Doch ließ die Frau Bartels, Frau Bartel, Bartel Bartels betrachten, wollte sie doch erforschen, wie dieser sich in ihrer Abwesenheit verhielt!

Perhaps, Indoeuropean languages tend to develop in this way. I find the inclusion of the article more and more often everywhere in Germany. It might be that speakers consider the Tom-Richard-Martin clarification a virtue. Note, however, that Greek, which inflects names and thus does not need such clarification, has also developed from a stage where omission of the article was allowed to mandatory inclusion!

| improve this answer | |
  • There can, however be little doubt, that standard German does not allow this usage ... Oh, there can be doubt alright. What is standard German anyway? What German are you referring to? As a pluricentric language there is not a single standard against all which usage must be compared. As to Austrian German, use of the definite article with persons is not restricted to informal speech. It's much rarer in formal speech, of course, simply because it is only used when talking about a third person. Also, if you want to sound very formal, you don't have to use it. – Ingmar Jul 23 '16 at 5:15
  • That said, it would be wrong to consider its use informal or dialect. The device has been used in literature as well. To pick a random example, I'm going to quote Jörg Mauthe's "Große Hitze, oder die Errettung Österreichs durch den Legationsrat Dr. Tuzzi". Der Herr Außenminister gab einen kurzen, fundierten Bericht ... (S. 37) Sehr verehrter Herr Professor, mein inzwischen leider erkrankter Kollege, der Ministerialrat Twaroch, hat vor geraumer Zeit ... (S. 147) – Ingmar Jul 23 '16 at 5:16
  • @Ingmar these are not examples of what we are discussing. These are articles in front of titles, a completely different issue. If you really find an occurrence, please tell me, be careful, however, to check the context, to see it is not a device used to make a character sound Bavarian, Austrian etc. I am really no enemy of this. I use it myself. As to what is standard German, it is a valid question, but we can't also deem everything Standarddeutsch, right? My minimal requirements would include: 1. Often attested in literature 2. Accepted in school – Ludi Jul 23 '16 at 7:01
  • I disagree, as the title is very much treated as part of the name in this novel. In Germany you'd probably say something like "mein Kollege, Studienrat Hauer", i.e. without the article. Either way, as an Austrian I use this all the time, and there is nothing wrong with doing so in written form. As to "standard" German: there's really no such thing, just like there's no "standard" English. "Austrian" German, which differs from "German" German in a few key aspects, is obviously accepted (and taught) in school. – Ingmar Jul 23 '16 at 7:41
  • A few more random examples: Fiedrich Torberg, die Tante Jolesch oder der Untergang des Abendlandes in Anekdoten: Der Onkel Jolesch war eine Art Prinzgemahl und wäre ohne die gleichnamige Tante gar nicht vorgekommen (S. 32) Jörg Mauthe, Demnächst oder der Stein des Sisyphos: Ich streife, vom Thomas begleitet, durch die Ruine ... (S. 81) Zum zweiten Mal lange Parteiverhandlungen im Zimmer des (damaligen Wiener Bürgermeisters Helmut, Anm.) Zilk (S. 174) – Ingmar Jul 23 '16 at 8:03


| improve this answer | |

In this context, it is added for emphasis.

"Ich bin der Philipp," translates into "I am the Philipp." (Not just a "random" Philipp.)

It connotes a sense of self-importance. although some Germans use it, this is not standard usage. It is best used for important people like Presidents (perhaps even of a company), that is the "big boss".

It is appropriate if someone happens to be the (wo)"man of the moment." For instance, if "Philipp" just published a best-selling book, or even a book, it might make sense to call him der Philipp for a period of time.

| improve this answer | |

Just my two cents here of a German native speaker well aware of good German but not professional concerned with language:

Concerning the "der" vs. "der Philip" I would "der" just classify as a special emphasis in spoken context, I see myself less a north-south gradient here as a question if I want to emphasize my name. When twenty people tell each other their names, I would add only "Philip" or

"Ich bin Philip"

whereas when I want more attention I could add a der.

It is worth to say that "Ich bin ..." is in less cases the common form of introduction or naming himself than in English. In German "Ich heiße" oder "Mein Name ist" is traditionally more common.

"I am Joseph Pulitzer, and you are hearing AM news."

would be not translated into proper German with

"Ich bin Joseph Pulitzer.."


"Ich heiße Joseph Pulitzer.."

despite the trend to use English constructions in German sentences.

When introducing himself to a larger audience, it is more proper to say:

"Mein Name ist Joseph Pulitzer."

(or "Ich heiße") instead of "Ich bin Joseph Pulitzer."

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer
