|
 |
FAQ-NL: Dutch | ||
Tags: The Netherlands | Dutch | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 17 of 509 15 November 2009 at 7:29pm | IP Logged | ||
|
To the native and fluent Dutch/Flemish forum members who have provided answers already to the questions, thank you very much. I'll avoid saying thanks to every answer because it will clutter up this thread too much. But I'd like all the contributors to know that their questions and answers are (and will be) very much appreciated.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 18 of 509 16 November 2009 at 1:59am | IP Logged | ||
|
FAQ-NL: Two pronunciations of "juli"?
I notice on the "NOS Journaal" news from The Netherlands, the normal pronunciation of July (juli) is like the English sound of "ulie" (which you'd expect), but quite frequently some of the journalists pronounce it like the English "Julie". However, I have never heard June (juni) pronounced with the English "J" sound. So how come I am hearing quite a few "Julie" pronunciations? And why have I never heard "juni" pronounced with the English "J" sound? Edited by tommus on 16 November 2009 at 2:00am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 19 of 509 16 November 2009 at 3:39pm | IP Logged | ||
|
FAQ-NL: Usage of "noordpool" and zuidpool"?
It seems from my reading in Dutch that the words "noordpool" and "zuidpool" are used all too frequently to mean the area around the north poles and the south poles, and not just the geographic poles. I think the correct words are "de arctis", and "de antarctis" or Antarctica. I think that in English, north and south pole used to be used in the same way, but in recent years with all the talk about global warming, the more correct terms of Arctic and Antarctic are being used most of the time. I have seen two recent articles in the Dutch and Belgian news where the word "zuidpool" has caused considerable confusion and heated discussion in online letters to the editor. One was about Cornelis Snijders being the first Netherlander to reach the "zuidpool" in 1904. However, it was Amundsen and then Scott who first reached the south pole in 1911 and 1912. Today there is an article in the Belgian news about two crates of Shackleton's whiskey being found at the "zuidpool". But Shackleton never reached the south pole. The whiskey is actually under his shack in the Antarctic. So the question is: Are noordpool and zuidpool the normal words that are used when actually the Arctic and Antarctic are meant? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 20 of 509 18 November 2009 at 3:18pm | IP Logged | ||
|
FAQ-NL: "Voorkomen" has opposite meanings?
When I encounter "voorkomen" in my reading, it always interrupts the flow. To me, the two main meanings are nearly opposites. It can mean both "to occur" and "to prevent from occurring". I have not yet encountered a sentence where it was ambiguous as to which meaning was meant. So that is not a problem. But it has become an "interrupt" word in my reading that causes me to think about both meanings each time. Both meanings occur a lot in spoken Dutch. I always listen for the difference in the pronunciation. The "occur" meaning accents the first syllable, and "prevent" the second. I think "occur" also puts a distinct pause between "voor" and "komen", and for this meaning, "voorkomen" is a separable verb. I think in the "prevent" meaning, "voorkomen" normally is not separated. Here is a good Wiki entry which indicates that the "prevent" word is not separable. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/voorkomen Question: Are native Dutch/Flemish speakers conscious of the opposing meanings of "voorkomen", is there extra space between the parts in the "occur" meaning, and can "voorkomen" sometimes be a separable verb in the "prevent" meaning? Question: Can a native speaker construct a short sentence with both meanings of "voorkomen" in it? It would be a translation of something like: "The disaster that could have been averted occurred." 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 21 of 509 18 November 2009 at 4:06pm | IP Logged | ||
|
FAQ-NL: "een groep van" with/without "van"?
You may be wondering where I am getting all these seemingly-obscure questions. They are from my daily Dutch reading. I am trying to improve my Dutch by more fully analysing sentences where words or grammar are not completely obvious to me. I notice that "van" appears to be somewhat optional in expressions containing "groep". Both "een groep van mensen" and "een groep mensen" are used extensively, the former being more common in a Google search. The same situation occurs with other collective words, such as "collectie". Are both usages (with and without "van") correct? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Vinbelgium Bilingual Tetraglot Groupie Belgium Joined 5620 days ago 61 posts - 73 votes Speaks: Dutch*, Flemish*, English, French Studies: Spanish, Russian | Message 22 of 509 18 November 2009 at 5:37pm | IP Logged | ||
1) I didn't realize about it until I read your question. To me the two words are two different words, because they are pronounced totally differently. Vóórkomen = to occur (seperable verb) Voorkómen = to prevent, to avert (not seperable verb) 2) De ramp die voorkomen zou kunnen zijn, kwam (toch) voor. An other example: Hoe kunnen we voorkomen dat deze dieren hier voorkomen? Try to distinguish the words by their pronunciation. Edited by Vinbelgium on 18 November 2009 at 6:43pm 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Vinbelgium Bilingual Tetraglot Groupie Belgium Joined 5620 days ago 61 posts - 73 votes Speaks: Dutch*, Flemish*, English, French Studies: Spanish, Russian | Message 23 of 509 18 November 2009 at 5:41pm | IP Logged | ||
Yes, both usages are correct. 'Een groep mensen' sounds better than 'Een groep van mensen' though. The first one is more colloquial, the latter is more formal. Edited by Vinbelgium on 18 November 2009 at 6:43pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5662 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 24 of 509 19 November 2009 at 4:08pm | IP Logged | ||
|
FAQ-NL: Do "de" and "het" word mistakes sound very bad?
To learn which Dutch words are "de" and which are "het" will take forever. I already know quite a few correctly. I know some of the general rules. I do ok in writing, but it is still very difficult when speaking to get it right. No time to think. It has to happen automatically. The agreement of the adjective is even more difficult. Question: How bad does it sound to native Dutch speakers when a non-native speaker makes an error with de/het? Question: Do native Dutch speakers and writers have any trouble with de/het words? For example, if you search in Google for "een klein boek", you get 61,100 hits. A search for "een kleine boek" gets 38,300 hits. I wonder who is making all these de/het errors? Question: Dutch isn't unique to having these sorts of characteristics in a language that are hard to learn, especially for second language learners. Many languages are a lot more complex. Does anyone know why or how languages evolve to have these kinds of "unnecessary" challenges? Why wouldn't it be simpler (and therefore more likely) for a language to evolve in such a way as to eliminate unnecessary complication, in this case, for example, to have only "de" words? Are there any logical reasons (such as maybe the "het" sound goes together better with some words and "de" would have sounded awkward.) why both "de" and "het" exist? 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. |
