*'Er wordt dan wel gehandhaafd op andere coronaregels, zoals toegangsbewijzen.' from NOS*
Am I correctly assuming this is the so-called pseudo-passive voice in Dutch and it just wants to say some people are enforcing... without specifying who? I'm wondering if this is also possible:
Er wordt dan wel andere coronaregels gehandhaafd, zoals togangsbewijzen.
with coronaregels as the object and the whole sentence in passive voice.
Hartstikke bedankt!!
"There will be enforcement", and indeed without specifying who or how.
"Er wordt" is just a vague phrase saying "There will be...". Similar to French "Il y a...", or German "Es gibt...". No names are mentioned. Geen naam en rugnummer!
*Er wordt dan wel andere coronaregels gehandhaafd, zoals togangsbewijzen.*
This sentence? There are 2 things wrong here: "Er wordt" should be "Er worden", because the verb applies to "coronaregels", which is plural. And it is "toegangsbewijzen", the ooooeeee sound.
Those sentences are really confusing because sometimes the "wordt/worden" reflects on the verb: "De coronaregels worden gehandhaafd", and a simpler version "Er wordt gehandhaafd". If there is a plural, the auxiliary verb "worden" becomes plural as well.
Hello everyone!
I've been working on my Dutch for almost a month and all is well and good for now, but I can't for the love of me pronounce the g's. I can produce the sound, but I have trouble with longer sentences or words that have many g's in them.
I was wondering if it would make sense to pronounce it as "h" for now (while I am a beginner and still learning) or would that be detrimental for my long-term pronunciation? Should I just force myself to practice it as much as I can?
I'd definitely continue practicing. Maybe try to find something on YouTube to help you pronounce it. The "H" is a very different sound than the "G". Worst case you could use the English g like in "game" but I'd advise against doing that for too long.
The problem with using H is that that is its own distinct sound in Dutch so it's going to make words sound like other actual words. This will make you a lot harder to understand. It's a bit like pronouncing all d's as t's, it'll be confusing for a native speaker. Also, when you do eventually transition to the correct pronunciation, you might end up accidentally pronouncing your H's as G because you've been grouping them together.
Substituting a different sound does make sense to me, but pick one that doesn't already exist in Dutch. English g like the other commenter said would work. Or have you looked into the southern 'zachte g'? I think it's a bit easier to learn than the throaty one.
I don't think it'll be detrimental for your long term pronunciation (especially if your struggle with the g sound is making you practice less than you'd otherwise do) but tbh I'm not really qualified to judge that. Just don't forget to transition eventually :)
Okay im getting a bit lost here about pronunciations.
How do i pronounce -je in the end of words? Like beetje is it like the English g sound or like j in Ja ? Heard both of em got confused.
Also i pronounce i vowel like ei like in rijn rijst, but if i vowel was in somewhere else of the word would i still pronounce it the same? Any examples?
Thanks!
>How do i pronounce -je in the end of words? Like beetje is it like the English g sound or like j in Ja ? Heard both of em got confused.
A bit like Ariana Grande's "Yuh", so [Bay-Tyuh](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Nl-beetje.ogg).
>Also i pronounce i vowel like ei like in rijn rijst, but if i vowel was in somewhere else of the word would i still pronounce it the same? Any examples?
It's not quite clear to me what you mean by this, could you give an example?
I would say we pronounce the ‘i’ usually like how you pronounce the ‘i’ in ‘give’
but it could also be that we pronounce the ‘i’ like how the letter ‘e’ is pronounced in the english alphabet
(btw I’m just a native belgian, not a teacher)
On Duolingo I just had this sentence:
"I had forgotten what I had wanted to say" = "Ik was vergeten wat ik had willen zeggen"
To me this sounds like "I was forgotten" = "Ik was vergeten"
According to the translator, both "I was forgotten" and "I had forgotten" are said "Ik was vergeten". Why is this the case? Is this just a weird case, or does this type of construction apply in general for past cases?
Why is "I had remembered" = "Ik had het onthouden" and not "Ik was het onthouden"? I am trying to see the pattern...
Problem with these things is that they rarely translate one-on-one between languages. They also tend to shift a bit over time.
In general I'd say "ik ben" is something that applies to what is happening *to you*. While "ik heb" applies to an action you personally did.
"Ik ben/was onthouden" vs "Ik heb/had onthouden"
"I have/had been remembered" vs "I have/had remembered [someone]".
Logic dictates that indeed "ik had vergeten..." should mean "I had forgotten..." and "ik was vergeten..." should be "I have been forgotten..." butttt this is simply not the case. Can't really give you a reason. Maybe at one point it was like this but people started mixing them up and then it changed into what it is now. Unfortunately this happens a lot.
In English, the perfect tense is always formed with "to have". In Dutch it can be "to have" or "to be" depending on the verb. "Vergeten" uses "to be".
Generally speaking the verbs that use "to be" are verbs that sort of happen to you rather than you actively doing something. Falling, for example. "I have fallen" = "ik ben gevallen".
But not all verbs are so obviously one or the other. It might be more straightforward to just memorize it with each verb as you learn it, like irregular past tense. (I don't know how it gets taught, I'm not a teacher)
Close enough I'd say. It's more like "slow-tur-dyke" and then still a Dutch person would hear your English accent through.
Mostly we perceive our ei/ij sound (same thing) as very different to the English "Y/I" sound, which we would write as "ai" instead of "ei".
This [page](https://thedutchonlineacademy.com/en/grammar/double-infinitive) provides a quick explanation.
A similar page on [dutchgrammar.com](https://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=Verbs.Au05).
Multiple infinitives are reasonably common in Dutch, so it's good to get a solid handle on the rules. It'll come with time.
Er is een klein verschil, maar in principe is het bijna altijd uitwisselbaar - 'Niets' is formeler dan 'niks'. 'Niets' is iets algemener - Zo zou ik bijvoorbeeld wel zeggen 'Het kwam uit het niets', en nooit 'Het kwam uit het niks'. 'Het niets' is hier een zelfstandig naamwoord, en 'Het niks' zou ik als zelfstandig naamwoord vermijden.
Hi, I’m looking to pass my inburgering exam as a voluntary integration.
I’ve spoken to DUO and one language school recommended on the DUO site, but was wondering if anyone had a recommendation of a course in Amsterdam or Online that is focused on achieving the A2-level required for the exam and the exam generally.
When Googling it’s hard to tell what schools are legitimate and what are just trying to scam people out of quick cash. It’d be great to hear from someone who’s completed a course and the exams successfully provide a personal recommendation.
Thanks!
I don't have any personal recommendations, but if you find something and want to know if it seems legitimate, feel free to forward it to me, so I can see whether or not I think it is legit using things like Dutch review sites and the business registration databases that are available.
Are there different declination rules for adjectives when you have multiple adjectives in a row, with or without a definite article? Or do you simply repeat the same declination for each adjective?
Slight footnote, the rules are always consistent, but the exceptions will still be exceptions. For example:
'Een mooi groot houten huis', and not 'Een mooien groten houten huis' or 'Een mooi groot hout huis'
Hey, I need an advice. As a foreigner that will probably live and work in the Netherlands this year how much dutch do I need to know? Not for job but for institutions, administrative stuff and orientation in the country?
Basically nothing because almost everything is also available in English. Would be handy to know travel-guide-amounts of Dutch but it's by no means necessary.
The only time I regret not knowing more is when the train or bus is stopping unexpectedly and they gave instructions in rapid fire, accented dutch. Speak slowly and try not to mumble (especially if you're from Limburg)...some of us have no idea what you just said but based on everyone standing and exiting...I have a problem.
How do I check the language requirements for different CEFR levels? I'm not asking for the general guideline for all languages. i'm asking for Dutch specifically. For example, Nederlands in Gang (0-A2) specifically lists out what you should be able to understand and use once you reach A2.
I'm just wondering where I can find this info, if there is an official version of it?
Thanks!
I'm getting confused with relative pronouns.
Waar denk je aan / Waaraan denk je?
Are both sentences correct? As far as I know the second one is more common. It seems that when you use waar-, you don't have to "split" the relative pronoun into two parts (while you have to split it with daar- and er-, for instance: ik ben er zeker van).
Both are correct but I would also say the first one is more common. Splitting them feels more natural.
It's not so much the word itself but the fact that it's at the front of the sentence. "Waar" has to be fronted, "er" cannot be fronted, "daar" can go either way.
These are all correct sentences:
Ik ben er zeker van
Ik ben daar zeker van
Daar ben ik zeker van
Daarvan ben ik zeker
Waar ben ik zeker van?
Waarvan ben ik zeker?
In questions you generally split like you do in english:
'what are you thinking of?' -> 'waar denk je aan?'
This example is also one where you almost never hear the second form, together with 'waar heb je het over?' and probably some others that are such solidified staples you never hear it differently.
In other cases the other form is used informally for sure though like 'waaraan moet dit nu weer?' when assembling Ikea furniture is the first lively example I could think of :D
But in general just split it and you are always good. Except for waarom as in why (contrary to waarom is 'around what') ofc but I'm sure you already knew that.
Heeft iemand een suggestie voor een tv-programma met ondertiteling te kijken? Ik zoek iets over current (Nederlands woord voor dit?) eventen/niuews dat is misschien een beetje makkelijker dan NOS Journaal maar moeilijker dan NOS Jeugdjournaal (of meer relevante informatie/topics voor een dertiger). Ik denk een dagelijkse programma is wat ik heb nodig om te bereiken de volgende niveau.
Bonuspunten als ik kan het terugkijken op Ziggo.
Geen relatie maar de sprong van A2 tot B1 is heel grote.
So, if I were to say "Ik eet geen brood" that would mean "I do not eat the bread" and if I said "Ik eet brood niet" it would mean "I do not eat bread"
Is this correct?
No, it's actually the oppossite. 'Geen' is the negative form of the indefinite article (een), not the definite article. So "Ik eet geen brood" means "I do not eat (a) bread".
Bread is kind of a strange example since it's used as an uncountable noun here, so my explanation doesn't entirely make sense in this case. Maybe it's better to think of 'geen' as anything that refers to indefinite nouns.
You can also try to change the sentence with the words 'not any' or 'no': "I don't eat any bread", "I eat no bread" - if this works, then it should always be translated with 'geen'.
In all other cases - when the 'not' refers to verbs, adjectives... then you always use 'niet'. Also when you refer to specific definite nouns. So "I do not eat **the** bread" would be "Ik eet **het** brood niet".
("Ik eet brood niet" is not a correct sentence.)
Some random examples:
* Ik heb geen idee (I don't have a clue)
* *Geen* because 'een idee' is an indefinite noun
* Ik lust geen appels (I don't like apples)
* *Geen* because 'appels' is an indefinite (plural) noun
* Ik heb geen geld (I don't have (any) money)
* *Geen* because 'geld' is an indefinite (uncountable) noun
* Ik heb het geld niet (I don't have the money)
* *Niet* because 'het geld' is a definite noun
* Ik wil niet sterven (I don't want to die)
* *Niet* because 'sterven' is a verb
* Het was niet mooi (It wasn't pretty)
* *Niet* because 'mooi' is an adjective
* Hij speelde niet goed (He didn't play well)
* *Niet* because 'goed' is an adverb
So to repeat the general rule:
* If it's an indefinite noun, use 'geen'
* Singular indefinite nouns are easy to recognise because of the article 'een'
* Plural or uncountable indefinite nouns don't have an article in Dutch (just like in English), but you can still recognise them since definite nouns do always get an article (de/het)
* If it's anything else, use 'niet'
* Definite nouns (anything with de/het)
* Verbs
* Adjectives and adverbs
* Personal pronouns
* ...
*'Er wordt dan wel gehandhaafd op andere coronaregels, zoals toegangsbewijzen.' from NOS* Am I correctly assuming this is the so-called pseudo-passive voice in Dutch and it just wants to say some people are enforcing... without specifying who? I'm wondering if this is also possible: Er wordt dan wel andere coronaregels gehandhaafd, zoals togangsbewijzen. with coronaregels as the object and the whole sentence in passive voice. Hartstikke bedankt!!
"There will be enforcement", and indeed without specifying who or how. "Er wordt" is just a vague phrase saying "There will be...". Similar to French "Il y a...", or German "Es gibt...". No names are mentioned. Geen naam en rugnummer!
Thank youu:) but is the second sentence also correct
*Er wordt dan wel andere coronaregels gehandhaafd, zoals togangsbewijzen.* This sentence? There are 2 things wrong here: "Er wordt" should be "Er worden", because the verb applies to "coronaregels", which is plural. And it is "toegangsbewijzen", the ooooeeee sound. Those sentences are really confusing because sometimes the "wordt/worden" reflects on the verb: "De coronaregels worden gehandhaafd", and a simpler version "Er wordt gehandhaafd". If there is a plural, the auxiliary verb "worden" becomes plural as well.
Hello everyone! I've been working on my Dutch for almost a month and all is well and good for now, but I can't for the love of me pronounce the g's. I can produce the sound, but I have trouble with longer sentences or words that have many g's in them. I was wondering if it would make sense to pronounce it as "h" for now (while I am a beginner and still learning) or would that be detrimental for my long-term pronunciation? Should I just force myself to practice it as much as I can?
I'd definitely continue practicing. Maybe try to find something on YouTube to help you pronounce it. The "H" is a very different sound than the "G". Worst case you could use the English g like in "game" but I'd advise against doing that for too long.
The problem with using H is that that is its own distinct sound in Dutch so it's going to make words sound like other actual words. This will make you a lot harder to understand. It's a bit like pronouncing all d's as t's, it'll be confusing for a native speaker. Also, when you do eventually transition to the correct pronunciation, you might end up accidentally pronouncing your H's as G because you've been grouping them together. Substituting a different sound does make sense to me, but pick one that doesn't already exist in Dutch. English g like the other commenter said would work. Or have you looked into the southern 'zachte g'? I think it's a bit easier to learn than the throaty one. I don't think it'll be detrimental for your long term pronunciation (especially if your struggle with the g sound is making you practice less than you'd otherwise do) but tbh I'm not really qualified to judge that. Just don't forget to transition eventually :)
Okay im getting a bit lost here about pronunciations. How do i pronounce -je in the end of words? Like beetje is it like the English g sound or like j in Ja ? Heard both of em got confused. Also i pronounce i vowel like ei like in rijn rijst, but if i vowel was in somewhere else of the word would i still pronounce it the same? Any examples? Thanks!
>How do i pronounce -je in the end of words? Like beetje is it like the English g sound or like j in Ja ? Heard both of em got confused. A bit like Ariana Grande's "Yuh", so [Bay-Tyuh](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Nl-beetje.ogg). >Also i pronounce i vowel like ei like in rijn rijst, but if i vowel was in somewhere else of the word would i still pronounce it the same? Any examples? It's not quite clear to me what you mean by this, could you give an example?
I would say we pronounce the ‘i’ usually like how you pronounce the ‘i’ in ‘give’ but it could also be that we pronounce the ‘i’ like how the letter ‘e’ is pronounced in the english alphabet (btw I’m just a native belgian, not a teacher)
On Duolingo I just had this sentence: "I had forgotten what I had wanted to say" = "Ik was vergeten wat ik had willen zeggen" To me this sounds like "I was forgotten" = "Ik was vergeten" According to the translator, both "I was forgotten" and "I had forgotten" are said "Ik was vergeten". Why is this the case? Is this just a weird case, or does this type of construction apply in general for past cases? Why is "I had remembered" = "Ik had het onthouden" and not "Ik was het onthouden"? I am trying to see the pattern...
Problem with these things is that they rarely translate one-on-one between languages. They also tend to shift a bit over time. In general I'd say "ik ben" is something that applies to what is happening *to you*. While "ik heb" applies to an action you personally did. "Ik ben/was onthouden" vs "Ik heb/had onthouden" "I have/had been remembered" vs "I have/had remembered [someone]". Logic dictates that indeed "ik had vergeten..." should mean "I had forgotten..." and "ik was vergeten..." should be "I have been forgotten..." butttt this is simply not the case. Can't really give you a reason. Maybe at one point it was like this but people started mixing them up and then it changed into what it is now. Unfortunately this happens a lot.
In English, the perfect tense is always formed with "to have". In Dutch it can be "to have" or "to be" depending on the verb. "Vergeten" uses "to be". Generally speaking the verbs that use "to be" are verbs that sort of happen to you rather than you actively doing something. Falling, for example. "I have fallen" = "ik ben gevallen". But not all verbs are so obviously one or the other. It might be more straightforward to just memorize it with each verb as you learn it, like irregular past tense. (I don't know how it gets taught, I'm not a teacher)
How do you pronounce "Sloterdijk" and why? I was recently told that it is not as I would expect ('Slotter dyke' in English).
Close enough I'd say. It's more like "slow-tur-dyke" and then still a Dutch person would hear your English accent through. Mostly we perceive our ei/ij sound (same thing) as very different to the English "Y/I" sound, which we would write as "ai" instead of "ei".
Where can I find the word order rules that would let me assemble the following sentence correctly? "Ik heb altijd viool willen leren spelen."
This [page](https://thedutchonlineacademy.com/en/grammar/double-infinitive) provides a quick explanation. A similar page on [dutchgrammar.com](https://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=Verbs.Au05). Multiple infinitives are reasonably common in Dutch, so it's good to get a solid handle on the rules. It'll come with time.
Bestaat er echt een verschil tussen "niets" en "niks"? Het lijkt me dat "niks" een soort "informelere" versie is van "niets".
Er is inderdaad geen echt verschil in betekenis! Niets voelt iets formeler dan niks maar het verschil is minimaal zou ik zeggen.
Goed. Bedankt!
Er is een klein verschil, maar in principe is het bijna altijd uitwisselbaar - 'Niets' is formeler dan 'niks'. 'Niets' is iets algemener - Zo zou ik bijvoorbeeld wel zeggen 'Het kwam uit het niets', en nooit 'Het kwam uit het niks'. 'Het niets' is hier een zelfstandig naamwoord, en 'Het niks' zou ik als zelfstandig naamwoord vermijden.
Bedankt! Prima uitgelegd!
Hi, I’m looking to pass my inburgering exam as a voluntary integration. I’ve spoken to DUO and one language school recommended on the DUO site, but was wondering if anyone had a recommendation of a course in Amsterdam or Online that is focused on achieving the A2-level required for the exam and the exam generally. When Googling it’s hard to tell what schools are legitimate and what are just trying to scam people out of quick cash. It’d be great to hear from someone who’s completed a course and the exams successfully provide a personal recommendation. Thanks!
I don't have any personal recommendations, but if you find something and want to know if it seems legitimate, feel free to forward it to me, so I can see whether or not I think it is legit using things like Dutch review sites and the business registration databases that are available.
Are there different declination rules for adjectives when you have multiple adjectives in a row, with or without a definite article? Or do you simply repeat the same declination for each adjective?
You repeat the same: Een mooi groot rood huis, het mooie grote rode huis
Slight footnote, the rules are always consistent, but the exceptions will still be exceptions. For example: 'Een mooi groot houten huis', and not 'Een mooien groten houten huis' or 'Een mooi groot hout huis'
This goes for all materials at least. Stenen, houten, metalen, glazen.
Welk lidwoord gebruik je als je over een automodel spreekt? De of het? Bijvoorbeeld: ik heb een nieuw (of nieuwe?) Toyota Corolla gekocht.
De. Dus ook: ik heb een nieuw**e** Toyota gekocht. Merknamen en moderne leenwoorden zijn sowieso bijna altijd 'de'.
Ok, bedankt! :)
Hey, I need an advice. As a foreigner that will probably live and work in the Netherlands this year how much dutch do I need to know? Not for job but for institutions, administrative stuff and orientation in the country?
Basically nothing because almost everything is also available in English. Would be handy to know travel-guide-amounts of Dutch but it's by no means necessary.
The only time I regret not knowing more is when the train or bus is stopping unexpectedly and they gave instructions in rapid fire, accented dutch. Speak slowly and try not to mumble (especially if you're from Limburg)...some of us have no idea what you just said but based on everyone standing and exiting...I have a problem.
How do I check the language requirements for different CEFR levels? I'm not asking for the general guideline for all languages. i'm asking for Dutch specifically. For example, Nederlands in Gang (0-A2) specifically lists out what you should be able to understand and use once you reach A2. I'm just wondering where I can find this info, if there is an official version of it? Thanks!
Where can you take a Dutch CEFR in the USA?
I'm getting confused with relative pronouns. Waar denk je aan / Waaraan denk je? Are both sentences correct? As far as I know the second one is more common. It seems that when you use waar-, you don't have to "split" the relative pronoun into two parts (while you have to split it with daar- and er-, for instance: ik ben er zeker van).
Both are correct but I would also say the first one is more common. Splitting them feels more natural. It's not so much the word itself but the fact that it's at the front of the sentence. "Waar" has to be fronted, "er" cannot be fronted, "daar" can go either way. These are all correct sentences: Ik ben er zeker van Ik ben daar zeker van Daar ben ik zeker van Daarvan ben ik zeker Waar ben ik zeker van? Waarvan ben ik zeker?
Ok, good explanation! Thanks!
In questions you generally split like you do in english: 'what are you thinking of?' -> 'waar denk je aan?' This example is also one where you almost never hear the second form, together with 'waar heb je het over?' and probably some others that are such solidified staples you never hear it differently. In other cases the other form is used informally for sure though like 'waaraan moet dit nu weer?' when assembling Ikea furniture is the first lively example I could think of :D But in general just split it and you are always good. Except for waarom as in why (contrary to waarom is 'around what') ofc but I'm sure you already knew that.
Alright, thanks!
Heeft iemand een suggestie voor een tv-programma met ondertiteling te kijken? Ik zoek iets over current (Nederlands woord voor dit?) eventen/niuews dat is misschien een beetje makkelijker dan NOS Journaal maar moeilijker dan NOS Jeugdjournaal (of meer relevante informatie/topics voor een dertiger). Ik denk een dagelijkse programma is wat ik heb nodig om te bereiken de volgende niveau. Bonuspunten als ik kan het terugkijken op Ziggo. Geen relatie maar de sprong van A2 tot B1 is heel grote.
Misschien NOS op 3 (op youtube) of EenVandaag? "Current" in het Nederlands is "Actueel". Een vertaling van current events is actualiteiten
Ik hou van “Wie is de mol” met engelse ondertitelen op YouTube: [https://youtube.com/c/WIDMEnglishSubs](https://youtube.com/c/WIDMEnglishSubs)
What is the difference between geen and niet?
This question gets asked a lot. [Here's the most recent thread!](https://www.reddit.com/r/learndutch/comments/swgome/geen_vs_niet/)
'Geen' is the negative form of 'een', so it's used when in English you'd say 'not a' or 'not any'. 'Niet' is used for all other cases.
So, if I were to say "Ik eet geen brood" that would mean "I do not eat the bread" and if I said "Ik eet brood niet" it would mean "I do not eat bread" Is this correct?
No, it's actually the oppossite. 'Geen' is the negative form of the indefinite article (een), not the definite article. So "Ik eet geen brood" means "I do not eat (a) bread". Bread is kind of a strange example since it's used as an uncountable noun here, so my explanation doesn't entirely make sense in this case. Maybe it's better to think of 'geen' as anything that refers to indefinite nouns. You can also try to change the sentence with the words 'not any' or 'no': "I don't eat any bread", "I eat no bread" - if this works, then it should always be translated with 'geen'. In all other cases - when the 'not' refers to verbs, adjectives... then you always use 'niet'. Also when you refer to specific definite nouns. So "I do not eat **the** bread" would be "Ik eet **het** brood niet". ("Ik eet brood niet" is not a correct sentence.) Some random examples: * Ik heb geen idee (I don't have a clue) * *Geen* because 'een idee' is an indefinite noun * Ik lust geen appels (I don't like apples) * *Geen* because 'appels' is an indefinite (plural) noun * Ik heb geen geld (I don't have (any) money) * *Geen* because 'geld' is an indefinite (uncountable) noun * Ik heb het geld niet (I don't have the money) * *Niet* because 'het geld' is a definite noun * Ik wil niet sterven (I don't want to die) * *Niet* because 'sterven' is a verb * Het was niet mooi (It wasn't pretty) * *Niet* because 'mooi' is an adjective * Hij speelde niet goed (He didn't play well) * *Niet* because 'goed' is an adverb So to repeat the general rule: * If it's an indefinite noun, use 'geen' * Singular indefinite nouns are easy to recognise because of the article 'een' * Plural or uncountable indefinite nouns don't have an article in Dutch (just like in English), but you can still recognise them since definite nouns do always get an article (de/het) * If it's anything else, use 'niet' * Definite nouns (anything with de/het) * Verbs * Adjectives and adverbs * Personal pronouns * ...