|
 |
FAQ-NL: Dutch | ||
Tags: The Netherlands | Dutch | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| Vini Diglot Newbie Brazil Joined 4927 days ago 24 posts - 22 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English Studies: Latin, Dutch | Message 249 of 509 24 January 2011 at 9:45pm | IP Logged | |||||
I am currently using Dutch With Easy, by Assimil (a book), I am finding it quite good... 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Vini Diglot Newbie Brazil Joined 4927 days ago 24 posts - 22 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English Studies: Latin, Dutch | Message 250 of 509 24 January 2011 at 9:47pm | IP Logged | |||||
Danke u wel! I need another explanation, see these two sentences: Kinderen zijn nieuwsgierig. Kinderen nieuwsgierig zijn. The second is "the correct one", why ain't #1 possible? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| JanKG Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5586 days ago 245 posts - 280 votes  Speaks: Dutch*, English, German, French Studies: Italian, Finnish | Message 251 of 509 24 January 2011 at 9:55pm | IP Logged | |||||
There was a mistake above: only the first is possible. I'd say SvOV is the unmarked order, the most common one: the subject being followed by the conjugated verb. However, in subclauses, i.e., clauses that are part of another sentence and that begin with a subordinating conjunction (ask for a list if necessary, but "dat" is the main conjunction) or a relative PRO, or a question word, the word order is CONJ S O vV (all verbs at the end of the clause). So 1. Main clause: & nbsp; Kinderen zijn nieuwsgierig. 2. Subclause : Ik denk dat kinderen nieuwsgierig zijn Edited by JanKG on 28 January 2011 at 5:01pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5685 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 252 of 509 26 January 2011 at 2:37pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
FAQ-NL: fatale 'voor'?
I read the following sentence in De Telegraaf today: "Die ziekte werd het afgelopen jaar zeker 134 mensen in het Aziatische land fataal." In English, the word fatal in this context requires the addition of 'for'. You could say that the 'sickness was fatal' but if you add an object, you have to say 'fatal for someone', for example. Question: Is 'voor' or 'tegen' or some similar word normally used with 'fatale', or is it just not required? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| JanKG Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5586 days ago 245 posts - 280 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, German, French Studies: Italian, Finnish | Message 253 of 509 26 January 2011 at 3:08pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I'd say "voor 134 mensen" is not impossible, which could be explained by referring to the fact that is a kind of indirect object, or betrokkenheidsobject as in "Ik kocht mij een auto". That would explain why you can drop it, as in "Ik geef jou een cadeau" (or "aan jou"). I found 70600 hits for "fataal voor" on the internet.
But this seems to be a phenomenon one only sees with "fataal worden voor".I was just thinking: "ademnood is fataal voor vissen"/ "wordt vissen fataal" are perfect, but not *"is vissen fataal". Strange. . This object without preposition seems most common with persons (and personalised things), but "Het wordt die economie fataal" seems quite possible. Edited by JanKG on 26 January 2011 at 3:09pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5685 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 254 of 509 26 January 2011 at 3:16pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
FAQ-NL: Word order with short phrases?
I read this sentence in De Telegraaf about President Obama's speech last night: "Nieuwe wetten zullen alleen worden aangenomen met steun van Democraten én Republikeinen." Could this sentence also be written correctly as; "Nieuwe wetten zullen alleen met steun van Democraten én Republikeinen worden aangenomen." or "Nieuwe wetten zullen worden alleen met steun van Democraten én Republikeinen aangenomen."? I sometimes see what I think might be word order in translated material that may not be the same as word order in originally-Dutch material. Or it could be just my imagination. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| JanKG Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5586 days ago 245 posts - 280 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, German, French Studies: Italian, Finnish | Message 255 of 509 26 January 2011 at 3:36pm | IP Logged | |||||
I'd say: (1) and (2) are fine (1 being simply more 'relaxed' than 2: we don't want too much between conjugated verb and the rest of the verbs depending on it), but (3) is not. The reason for that is simple: in Dutch we split up S+CV and RV in main clauses if there is a "not too long" E/extra part in the sentence. (By CV I mean the conjugated verb and by RV the rest of the verbs depending on the cv.) SO: Ik moet gaan. Ik moet E/ nu RV/ gaan. (*ik moet gaan nu --- only in very informal spoken language) Ik zou E/ naar daar RV/ moeten gaan. You see ? What follows here, is extra, not important as such. What you do read in Flanders (whereas it is incorrect): *Ik zou RV1/moeten E/in dienst RV2/treden. (Wrong because RV is split up) However, there might be some justification: we consider E+RV2 an expression. For example you can distinguish Dutch and Flemish written language in this way: [NL]Je zult vroeger op moeten staan. [FL] Je zult vroeger moeten opstaan. Yet, there is nothing wrong with the Flemish version because 'opstaan' is considered one verb. Edited by JanKG on 26 January 2011 at 3:38pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| ReneeMona Diglot Senior Member Netherlands Joined 5154 days ago 864 posts - 1274 votes Speaks: Dutch*, EnglishC2 Studies: French | Message 256 of 509 26 January 2011 at 5:20pm | IP Logged | |||||
I wouldn't be so quick to call one the "Flemish version" and another the "Dutch version". I have heard both these sentences be used in Dutch and both sound completely natural to me. Edited by ReneeMona on 26 January 2011 at 5:29pm 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
