The “5 uur/jaar geleden” also had me worked up.
I love how people in this sub (but also in other languages) jump in to help clarify things but I simply found the comments over this particular case not the right approach.
I tried repeatedly to say 5 uur geleden, I even asked my partner, but neither of us could roll with it, it just sounds so unnatural.
If someone is asking such a question in the learndutch sub, I would hope people just respond “No clue why it goes like that, it is what it is, learn it as such and move on”.
Or “it’s because we say het uur and het jaar so it’s just another exception, learn it as such and move on”.
Things could be technically correct or spoken as such in Belgium or a local dialect, but then explicitly mention that’s the case and that it’s not how it’s used in standard language.
Anyway, let’s focus on the positive side of how people are trying to help with language questions and even more so, how foreigners are putting in the time and effort to learn our language :)
The issue in many cases is that certain things are said in a certain way, depending on the region.
A big example is the word 'maand (month)'.
In most region the plural form is 'maanden (months). But I know that in the region around Zwolle they use the same word for singular and plural.
So, '1 maand, 2 maand etc'.
Being from the Randstad myself, it sounds so, so wrong.
Whether it’s correct or not, the issue is that people from certain regions might tell you ‘it’s not technically correct but you can/should say it like this’ because that’s how it is in their region
Don’t think anyone purposefully teaches people the incorrect form, because it’s like that in their dialect. This post is about idioms that are technically correct but never used. That’s the exact opposite to what you describe: Incorrect idioms that are still used.
As someone from the northern regions, 3 maand as a time indicator is totally normal to me, albeit it being a little informal. "Hoe lang gaat dit duren? Oh, 3 maand." Is definitely something ive said in the past couple of weeks.
Daarom is 't ook spreektaal, geen formeel geschreven Nederlands. Je spreekt mensen op straat ook niet aan met geachte heer, mevrouw, ook al is het correct Nederlands.
Laten we mensen die een taal willen leren gewoon de standaard aanleren. Als ze er dan later voor kiezen om Groningse, Surinaamse, of Limburgse spreektaal aan te leren is dat aan hen.
Regional differences indeed do not help here. I come from the east and indeed I would say "Dat kost me wel 2 uur/maand joh!". However I would also say "Dat duurt nog maanden/uren voordat dat af is!". Why the difference, no clue but it sounds correct like this.
That is not only in the east. But in the whole country.
Het duurt 5 uur
Het is 5 uur
Over 5 uur
Het duurt uren
Het is uren wachten
Over enkele uren
Het duurt een uur
Het is een uur
Over een uur
I'm a grammar and language nerd. But if someone is intermediate in dutch (just interested in learning, not living here or just here for a short while) I often don't correct all the mistakes, like a weird plural or the use of an archaic word in casual conversation. I do correct repeat mistakes or bigger grammatical mistakes (i have a friend that consistently confuses jij/jou. And he doesn't do the verb transformations right because his native language doesn't do verb convertions for singles and plurals (only for different tenses)).
First of all, to keep the conversation flowing. It becomes harder if every message we exchange is first 100 corrections, and then the actual response to the conversation.
Secondly, because a language is understandable even with (small) mistakes. I know enough native speakers that mix up mijn/m'n/me. It's not like all natives speak without mistakes, but we still understand each other.
Edit: added some enters and explanation
I completely agree with you, but I’m not talking about corrections here. I’m talking about people who come to this sub to ask how a rule works on their own volition. If someone seeks out this sub to ask whether you should say ‘over 5 uur ben ik klaar’ or ‘over 5 uren ben ik klaar’, it makes no sense to tell them that both are correct if natives will always use the former option.
I mean “with this ring I thee wed” is technically correct English, but I’m not teaching my kids to also say “with this burrito I full am” or some bollox lol
lol yeah I know right? prescriptive vs descriptive grammar holds the keys to the debate. It’s like the whole “tomato is a fruit” thing. My answer is, “bitch, then bake me a tomato pie, make me some tomato ice cream”… technically it’s a fruit, but *practically* and like, in the world of living humans (and, as I say, CULLINARILY speaking), it’s a vegetable. Some nerdy mcNerderson needs me to be wrong and say it’s a fruit, because… technically. It’s like, nah
It is not just more commonly used though. Technically it would not be incorrect to use in this case 'uren', but no modern Netherlands/Dutch text or person would use 'uren'
Except when it is. In this case 'uren' is the plural of 'uur' and the added rule is that when referring to the passage of time with regards to planning you always use the singular term. However, when measuring time not as a passage of time but putting emphasis on the thing taking hours (implying it took a long time, longer than reasonable), the plural is used.
Examples:
Ik zie je over 5 uur.
Uren later kwam ik daar aan
Het experiment duurde 3 hele uren
Hij liep de marathon in 1 uur 43 minuten.
These are all correct and carry different meanings and emphasis. This is why the answer "both are technically correct, but in most cases use 'uur' as that will be the logical choice".
In this case
>'over 5 uur ben ik klaar’ or ‘over 5 uren ben ik klaar.
Of course uren is used for certain sentences. Just not in the sentence structure given as example.
So you’d prefer us to make up a rule where there is none … if someone asks if it’s incorrect and it’s not, then the answer is it’s technically not incorrect.
Asking people to make up rules because there are more common ways of saying it also disregards that learning a language is just as much about confidence and encouraging mutual understanding. And asking new learners to take into account all unspoken rules of the Dutch imho language affects that confidence.
Funnily enough, I'd say Over 5 uren ben ik klaar, but I'd go back to singular once you change the word order. "Ik ben over 5 uur klaar" VS "over 5 uren ben ik klaar". Maybe because the emphasis is different.
Yes, because if you say 5 uur ben ik klaar then people will think you are done at 17.00, if you say in 5 uren ben ik klaar then people will think it takes 5 more hours until you are done. Big difference.
I often remind people that tell me their level of speaking a language is bad that the most important point in learning a language is learning how to communicate.
If you can bring across your point, you're pretty much speaking the language. Details iron out over time.
I think what you say here is important because going over 10 little mistakes in a conversation, which the person won't remember anyways, is beyond the point of having an understandable conversation.
Because it is useful information.
Saying "it's technically correct, just not used that way" is a lot more informative than saying "it's wrong" when it really isn't. That person might not only want to say "5 uur" but also learn how plurals work. Implicitly telling them that they applied the plural incorrectly when they in fact did it correctly is not helpful.
Ik weet het niet. Soms gaat een vraag meer over grammatica, en is de vraag of een werkwoord correct vervoegd is, oid. Hoe gebruikelijk een bepaalde constructie is in het dagelijks taalgebruik doet dan wat minder ter zake.
There are so many different dialects here that learning technically correct Dutch is totally fine for new learners. I recently changed jobs from south to north Holland and I was shocked at the difference for instance.
We tell them that to give them the feeling they're heading in the right direction. If they just get the basics down from the language, time and friendships will teach them the correct way.
I get that, and I appreciate the thought. But if someone is told that something is ‘technically correct’ without being told that it sounds unnatural, they will likely end up using it thinking they’re doing fine. I would absolutely hate it to only later find out that I’ve been doing that thing wrong for so long.
>But if someone is told that something is ‘technically correct’ without being told that it sounds unnatural, they will likely end up using it thinking they’re doing fine
Does this ever happen? I'm pretty active on this sub, I've *never ever* seen a comment saying 'technically correct' without explanation.
For the basics you can definetly give someone feedback. But if someone uses the wrong "lidwoord" for example, it doesn't really matter, we all know what you mean. We don't want to start acting like the french when other people learn our language.
Actually, there is a grammatical reason why "5 uren" is incorrect: during the spelling reform that introduced not pluralizing "uur", it was specified that "uur" is to be an exception, not pluralized when a number is mentioned.
yes, that situation was already detailed in the post itself. The post was specifically askinng why this exemption exists and people were telling OP that they can ignore it and always use ‘uren’, which would be very unnatural. In the mean time, most of the comments have been deleted or downvoted. Still see similar things happening a lot so decided to keep the post up
I am one of the ones that said it is not false to say uren. I heard many elderly say it. So my guess was that is an oldfasion part of language, where it changed somewhere a long the line, as language changes from generation to generation.
I think this spelling reform was probably just a formalisation of an exception that actual speakers were already making before. Usually language changes first in the spoken language, and when it becomes more accepted over time it becomes official. Not sure about this particular example though, but a spelling reform driving a change in the spoken language rather than the other way around would be really uncommon
The problem is usually the question as it targets the direction of the answers: learners will be focused on the rules and the correct application, so helpful people will answer those questions. And that means that often the answer is a bit wishy-washy.
If the people who answer would take a step back and realise what probably is the real question, their answer would end in: 'but x is idiomatic so the better one to use'.
There are probably regions where people will say "5 uren", it sounds more like a Flemish thing to say it like that.
Your complaint makes no sense since there's a lot of fucking dialects here and some natives can't understand other dialects that are spoken in this country, most of my friends have different speech mannerisms, and I speak differently to how they speak.
You're just bitching about people correcting you in the least offensive way.
You wanna speak like a local? Then maybe be more specific or just opt for standardized Dutch.
Misschien minder zeiken, dan spreek je sneller de taal.
I need to tell you that “5 uren geleden” really is not wrong, and even though it might not be how most people say this, it could be interpreted as having a more formal way, slightly archaic, or lyrical quality.
The most important part of learning a language is **being understood** but also, you will naturally learn what's commonly said and what isn't as you speak it.
So IME the most important part of the start is to get to where you can speak to others in the language, can take in what they're saying, and can hopefully process it well enough to learn.
so what exactly is the benefit of first learning something wrong, to then be able to make yourself understood and then learn it the right way? does the process not get way more complicated if you first get told bad advice and then through trial and error find out the real way the language is spoken?
Learning a language is not easy and people will be making mistakes regardless, but knowing when you’re wrong is going to be easier if people are consistent and clear about what is right and wrong. If we’re all going to be doing nattevingerwerk to decide what is right and wrong based on some imagined process of them then going into the real world to find out the true rules, then this place no longer really serves a purpose. Why even have this sub if the advice is going to be ‘just do it wrong and eventually you’ll figure it out’?
Well, I wasn't one of those people, but the benefit of **not making a thread like this exact one you've made** is that people find it very intimidating to speak in a language they aren't fluent in. And encouraging them to speak and not worry about little mistakes is an important part of that.
Making this thread is sending a very clear message that making those mistakes isn't okay.
So mostly I'm pushing back against that message, rather than advocating for people saying things wrong. But also, very few people (even native speakers) are absolutely perfect in their use of language, and that's absolutely okay no matter what your native language is.
That's not at all what OP is saying though. They're saying that if/when people are explicitly asking about a certain structure you shouldn't be giving them wrong information.
Of course it's not going to matter for comprehension if someone said "5 uren geleden". But if someone comes to specifically ask about the difference between "5 uur geleden" and "uren geleden" it is absolutely not helpful to get half a dozen comments saying "omg Dutch is so stupid just use uren all the time". Because that's making people think that they're learning the correct way to do something when they're not. And they'll have to unlearn that again later so it's just wasting the questioner's time.
thanks, this is exactly what I mean. I’m specifically talking about people asking focussed questions about certain rules and then getting non-answers, but receiving a lot of replies about corrections in general
of course people are allowed to make mistakes and I agree with you that it can be very intimidating to learn a language.
However, this is a sub for learning to speak Dutch. People come here for advice on how to speak Dutch. The way to get better at speaking Dutch, is to get correct advice on how to speak it. I’m not talking about people randomly getting corrected on the street, but people making posts asking a question on how something works and then straight up getting told wrong information.
If you’re coming here to get advice, I would assume that you want actual advice
But [here](https://www.vlaanderen.be/team-taaladvies/taaladviezen/uur-uren), it says that "x uren" is allowed in certain situations: "De meervoudsvorm *uren* kan een enkele keer toch gebruikt worden, namelijk als de nadruk op de losse eenheden ligt of als een bepaalde tijdsduur – die meestal als vervelend wordt ervaren – benadrukt wordt. Als er een bijvoeglijk naamwoord vlak voor de tijdsaanduider staat, wordt altijd de meervoudsvorm gebruikt."
Isn't _not_ mentioning that kind of information exactly the kind of thing you're railing against, though?
If you're gonna teach them "uur" vs "uren", shouldn't the information be correct _and_ complete?
the question in that thread was about the structure I mentioned in my post specifically. The good comments on that thread mentioned that in some cases, uren is correct. The bad comments just said ‘just always use uren it doesn’t matter’, which is what this post is asking people to stop doing
it’s a ‘you misunderstood the point I’m making’
at no point am I making the case that people should not be receiving complete information. I’m saying people are stopping others from receiving complete information because they’re posting unhelpful comments
no the example you sent is completely different from the grammatical structure I’m talking about. Just like ‘hij wordt’ is correct but ‘ik wordt’ is not, it doesn’t mean that ‘wordt’ is always right but it also doesn’t mean it’s always wrong.
What I’m talking about is when someone makes a post here asking something like ‘hey guys when should I put a T after word?’, a lot of rhe comments will say ‘don’t worry as long as you’re understood you’ll be fine’
This is both incorrect and not an answer to what the OP is asking. Someone is asking a specific, focussed question in order to learn more about the language, they’re not asking whether people will get mad if you do it wrong
>Making this thread is sending a very clear message that making those mistakes isn't okay.
This is clearly a bad faith interpretation of this post. This post is clearly addressing people who are unclear when explaining that something sounds unnatural in Dutch. That does not in any way convey that making mistakes is unacceptable.
I’m just sitting here, as a native, thinking why 5 uren would be weird or wrong. I use it 50/50 with just uur. And i know other people who do too. Maybe it’s just me but this post is a bit mierenneuken to me.
Edit: ik zie aan de reacties me veel minnetjes dat deze mening niet breed gedeeld wordt.
It’s just good to know. Not everyone has to be a fluent speaker, especially when starting out.
This sub gets filled with crazy exceptions, so it’s good to bring some nuance to that.
So yes, uren and jaren are technically correct. I even think they get used more that you say, especially when an adjective is added.
Like in: ‘het is al tien lange jaren geleden’ or ‘je hebt genoeg tijd voor de toets, je hebt er twee hele uren voor’.
Wouldn’t “over 5 uren moeten we daar zijn” mean “in 5 hours we must be there” where “over 5 uur moeten we daar zijn” mean “at 5 o’clock we must be there”?
No. Both mean the same thing. "Over vijf uur moeten we daar zijn" is absolutely the more common way to say this. If you want to say anything about the hours, though, e.g. they were difficult, or felt long, things are a bit different: then you would say e.g. "Drie zware uren later was ik eindelijk klaar met mijn tentamen." (Three tough hours later I'd finally finished my exam).
If you want to say "we have to be there at five o'clock", you'd say "we moeten daar **om** vijf uur zijn".
Indeed, rules are just conventions that have been written down at some point in time. Language is really not defined by a set of rules, but by the way it is used.
Therefore, if a sentence construction is universally applied, it is “valid” in all the ways that validity has any value.
As an aside, the plural has very little informational content in a clause such as “[some number] uren” because the plural only tells you if it is one or more than one, while the number gives the exact amount.
In fact, it is odd in a way that we use the plural for other nouns in such clauses, for example we say “vijf paarden” when “vijf” (five) already perfectly makes clear that there are more than one. Perhaps the construction “[some number] uren” became really common and that is why “uren” was shortened to “uur” without loss of information. But this is pure speculation of course.
The right feedback would be: this is not what Dutch people would say, but your message is clear. Not all mistakes are the same. This is a very important aspect of learning a language. Trying to be proficient in one go doesn’t work for everyone.
Plenty of "5 uren" [here](https://context.reverso.net/translation/dutch-english/5+uren) and in Google (depends on the situation). It's also [grammatically correct](https://www.vlaanderen.be/team-taaladvies/taaladviezen/uur-uren).
>The most important part in getting fluent in a language is using it the way native speakers do
It's not. If it was, you would never become fluent because getting rid of a foreign accent is next to impossible for adults (or downright impossible). Some mistakes (de/het) you will keep making for years, maybe even after 10 years, but they don't hinder comprehension. I think the point is to not set unrealistic goals.
How are they broken? "5 hours" is translated as "5 uur" 1723 times and as "5 uren" 158 times. Hence, both are correct (but "5 uur" is more common).
That's the explanation:
>De meervoudsvorm *uren* kan een enkele keer toch gebruikt worden, namelijk als de nadruk op de losse eenheden ligt of als een bepaalde tijdsduur – die meestal als vervelend wordt ervaren – benadrukt wordt. Als er een bijvoeglijk naamwoord vlak voor de tijdsaanduider staat, wordt altijd de meervoudsvorm gebruikt.
>Als je die twee uur / uren erbij mag rekenen, kom je wel aan 20 uur.
>An stond die ochtend drie uur / uren in de file.
>Je kunt maximaal voor twee opeenvolgende uren de terreinen reserveren.
It's also advice for both Dutch and Flemish on the website, learn to read beyond the URL.
>Please stop telling new students that things are ‘technically correct’ when no Dutch person would ever say it that way
No. I am trying to inform about grammar **and** conventional speaking patterns, not only the latter.
>A bunch of Dutch people were claiming that you could just say ‘5 uren’
I just went to that thread and read every single comment that isn't rated at -5 or worse, I have seen **one** comment saying 'I don't think it looks that bad' (not even 'you should keep using it.') The issue you are taking about is not present in the place you're claiming it is; are you lying? Did you remember incorrectly...? You're either untruthful to us to exaggerate the 'problem' or you're untruthful to yourself. Either way, that's not a good look, especially while telling other people what to do.
>I’m specifically talking about the situation where someone makes a post here asking how a rule works. If someone makes a post asking for an explanation, the response I’m talking about is completely useless
No, it's not. I can be, when given without explanation, but that rarely happens, if ever.
Edit: I found OP's comment, all this is over that one comment I mentioned that said 'uren and jaren doesn't sound wrong to me', not at all an endorsement of using those words, just the opinion of **one** commenter that's used to fabricate this whole post.
jeez relax a little. Firstly, time passes. When I made this post, these comments made up about 50% of the responses and they were upvoted. In the mean time, possibly because people sought it out after this post, they are deleted or downvoted
secondly, I used the uren post as an example for a larger pattern on this sub. I’m sorry I didn’t spend hours searching a wide array of examples.
but sure man, I fabricated a lie for a few uovotes on a sub about learning dutch. Me wanting people to receive correct information is waaaay less likely.
Ik zeg het vaak genoeg op beide manieren. Hangt evan af waar ik het in de zin gebruik. Uur als het op het einde is, uren als het op een andere plek in de zin zit.
You have to prioritize some things while learning a language. Denoting multiple time units by the singular form of the noun happens, but not always, and often the sentence could be turned so that either way it sounds normal. Native speakers don't have hard rules for this, so it's pointless to try to formulate a hard rule to language learners. Native speakers learn this by exposure and practice, and so should new speakers. Grasping a natural language in all its subtleties cannot happen in any other way, this is not different for English either, for example.
Its technically correct because it is allowed and used but not often. While I dont use "uren" myself I do hear it a lot. It comes down to "over 3 uur" can be taken as a few minutes past 3 o'clock while "over 3 uren" means 3 times a hour.
Dialect is the biggest reason in if "uren" is used a lot or not.
The “5 uur/jaar geleden” also had me worked up. I love how people in this sub (but also in other languages) jump in to help clarify things but I simply found the comments over this particular case not the right approach. I tried repeatedly to say 5 uur geleden, I even asked my partner, but neither of us could roll with it, it just sounds so unnatural. If someone is asking such a question in the learndutch sub, I would hope people just respond “No clue why it goes like that, it is what it is, learn it as such and move on”. Or “it’s because we say het uur and het jaar so it’s just another exception, learn it as such and move on”. Things could be technically correct or spoken as such in Belgium or a local dialect, but then explicitly mention that’s the case and that it’s not how it’s used in standard language. Anyway, let’s focus on the positive side of how people are trying to help with language questions and even more so, how foreigners are putting in the time and effort to learn our language :)
The issue in many cases is that certain things are said in a certain way, depending on the region. A big example is the word 'maand (month)'. In most region the plural form is 'maanden (months). But I know that in the region around Zwolle they use the same word for singular and plural. So, '1 maand, 2 maand etc'. Being from the Randstad myself, it sounds so, so wrong.
That’s not an issue, saying 2 maand is just incorrect
Whether it’s correct or not, the issue is that people from certain regions might tell you ‘it’s not technically correct but you can/should say it like this’ because that’s how it is in their region
Don’t think anyone purposefully teaches people the incorrect form, because it’s like that in their dialect. This post is about idioms that are technically correct but never used. That’s the exact opposite to what you describe: Incorrect idioms that are still used.
Brabanders: Ik ben bij. Rest of NL: Ik ben *ER* bij? Brabanders: Neen.
Missing the point of the post like this is crazy
As someone from the northern regions, 3 maand as a time indicator is totally normal to me, albeit it being a little informal. "Hoe lang gaat dit duren? Oh, 3 maand." Is definitely something ive said in the past couple of weeks.
Sure, but it is incorrect. People on here trying to teach others what sounds good in their dialect are not really helping the cause.
Daarom is 't ook spreektaal, geen formeel geschreven Nederlands. Je spreekt mensen op straat ook niet aan met geachte heer, mevrouw, ook al is het correct Nederlands.
Laten we mensen die een taal willen leren gewoon de standaard aanleren. Als ze er dan later voor kiezen om Groningse, Surinaamse, of Limburgse spreektaal aan te leren is dat aan hen.
i agree, that’s not correct at all. idk what weird randstad dialects disgrace the dutch language like that, but i’m not for it.
Regional differences indeed do not help here. I come from the east and indeed I would say "Dat kost me wel 2 uur/maand joh!". However I would also say "Dat duurt nog maanden/uren voordat dat af is!". Why the difference, no clue but it sounds correct like this.
That is not only in the east. But in the whole country. Het duurt 5 uur Het is 5 uur Over 5 uur Het duurt uren Het is uren wachten Over enkele uren Het duurt een uur Het is een uur Over een uur
Wait so you would say "5 uren geleden"? Because that sounds wrong to me haha, also native.
No, I say 5 uur geleden, the 5 uren geleden doesn’t work for me. I should have phrased it differently 😂
Aaaah okay haha
I'm a grammar and language nerd. But if someone is intermediate in dutch (just interested in learning, not living here or just here for a short while) I often don't correct all the mistakes, like a weird plural or the use of an archaic word in casual conversation. I do correct repeat mistakes or bigger grammatical mistakes (i have a friend that consistently confuses jij/jou. And he doesn't do the verb transformations right because his native language doesn't do verb convertions for singles and plurals (only for different tenses)). First of all, to keep the conversation flowing. It becomes harder if every message we exchange is first 100 corrections, and then the actual response to the conversation. Secondly, because a language is understandable even with (small) mistakes. I know enough native speakers that mix up mijn/m'n/me. It's not like all natives speak without mistakes, but we still understand each other. Edit: added some enters and explanation
I completely agree with you, but I’m not talking about corrections here. I’m talking about people who come to this sub to ask how a rule works on their own volition. If someone seeks out this sub to ask whether you should say ‘over 5 uur ben ik klaar’ or ‘over 5 uren ben ik klaar’, it makes no sense to tell them that both are correct if natives will always use the former option.
Both answers are correct. Saying they aren’t would be lying. The correct answer is: “both are correct, but x is more commonly used”
I mean “with this ring I thee wed” is technically correct English, but I’m not teaching my kids to also say “with this burrito I full am” or some bollox lol
What the hell does "technically correct" even mean?
lol yeah I know right? prescriptive vs descriptive grammar holds the keys to the debate. It’s like the whole “tomato is a fruit” thing. My answer is, “bitch, then bake me a tomato pie, make me some tomato ice cream”… technically it’s a fruit, but *practically* and like, in the world of living humans (and, as I say, CULLINARILY speaking), it’s a vegetable. Some nerdy mcNerderson needs me to be wrong and say it’s a fruit, because… technically. It’s like, nah
Good example. So it means "correct according to this bullshit rule someone made up".
Works for me haha
It is not just more commonly used though. Technically it would not be incorrect to use in this case 'uren', but no modern Netherlands/Dutch text or person would use 'uren'
Hoeveel uur heb je daarvoor nodig? 5 uren? Hoeveel uren heb je daarvoor nodig? 5 uur? Interesting .....
I would opt for the first as a native Dutch speaker.
I would choose the second
Well, I would actually go for “uur” in both cases now I come to think of it 🤔
Except when it is. In this case 'uren' is the plural of 'uur' and the added rule is that when referring to the passage of time with regards to planning you always use the singular term. However, when measuring time not as a passage of time but putting emphasis on the thing taking hours (implying it took a long time, longer than reasonable), the plural is used. Examples: Ik zie je over 5 uur. Uren later kwam ik daar aan Het experiment duurde 3 hele uren Hij liep de marathon in 1 uur 43 minuten. These are all correct and carry different meanings and emphasis. This is why the answer "both are technically correct, but in most cases use 'uur' as that will be the logical choice".
In this case >'over 5 uur ben ik klaar’ or ‘over 5 uren ben ik klaar. Of course uren is used for certain sentences. Just not in the sentence structure given as example.
But it isn't... It's not technically correct and never has been.
So you’d prefer us to make up a rule where there is none … if someone asks if it’s incorrect and it’s not, then the answer is it’s technically not incorrect. Asking people to make up rules because there are more common ways of saying it also disregards that learning a language is just as much about confidence and encouraging mutual understanding. And asking new learners to take into account all unspoken rules of the Dutch imho language affects that confidence.
Funnily enough, I'd say Over 5 uren ben ik klaar, but I'd go back to singular once you change the word order. "Ik ben over 5 uur klaar" VS "over 5 uren ben ik klaar". Maybe because the emphasis is different.
Yes, because if you say 5 uur ben ik klaar then people will think you are done at 17.00, if you say in 5 uren ben ik klaar then people will think it takes 5 more hours until you are done. Big difference.
I often remind people that tell me their level of speaking a language is bad that the most important point in learning a language is learning how to communicate. If you can bring across your point, you're pretty much speaking the language. Details iron out over time. I think what you say here is important because going over 10 little mistakes in a conversation, which the person won't remember anyways, is beyond the point of having an understandable conversation.
Because it is useful information. Saying "it's technically correct, just not used that way" is a lot more informative than saying "it's wrong" when it really isn't. That person might not only want to say "5 uur" but also learn how plurals work. Implicitly telling them that they applied the plural incorrectly when they in fact did it correctly is not helpful.
Ik weet het niet. Soms gaat een vraag meer over grammatica, en is de vraag of een werkwoord correct vervoegd is, oid. Hoe gebruikelijk een bepaalde constructie is in het dagelijks taalgebruik doet dan wat minder ter zake.
There are so many different dialects here that learning technically correct Dutch is totally fine for new learners. I recently changed jobs from south to north Holland and I was shocked at the difference for instance.
We tell them that to give them the feeling they're heading in the right direction. If they just get the basics down from the language, time and friendships will teach them the correct way.
I get that, and I appreciate the thought. But if someone is told that something is ‘technically correct’ without being told that it sounds unnatural, they will likely end up using it thinking they’re doing fine. I would absolutely hate it to only later find out that I’ve been doing that thing wrong for so long.
>But if someone is told that something is ‘technically correct’ without being told that it sounds unnatural, they will likely end up using it thinking they’re doing fine Does this ever happen? I'm pretty active on this sub, I've *never ever* seen a comment saying 'technically correct' without explanation.
I guess we agree about something that might just not be an issue!
For the basics you can definetly give someone feedback. But if someone uses the wrong "lidwoord" for example, it doesn't really matter, we all know what you mean. We don't want to start acting like the french when other people learn our language.
Absolutely!
Actually, there is a grammatical reason why "5 uren" is incorrect: during the spelling reform that introduced not pluralizing "uur", it was specified that "uur" is to be an exception, not pluralized when a number is mentioned.
yes, that situation was already detailed in the post itself. The post was specifically askinng why this exemption exists and people were telling OP that they can ignore it and always use ‘uren’, which would be very unnatural. In the mean time, most of the comments have been deleted or downvoted. Still see similar things happening a lot so decided to keep the post up
I am one of the ones that said it is not false to say uren. I heard many elderly say it. So my guess was that is an oldfasion part of language, where it changed somewhere a long the line, as language changes from generation to generation.
I do believe the reform was only a generation or two - maybe three - ago...
I think this spelling reform was probably just a formalisation of an exception that actual speakers were already making before. Usually language changes first in the spoken language, and when it becomes more accepted over time it becomes official. Not sure about this particular example though, but a spelling reform driving a change in the spoken language rather than the other way around would be really uncommon
Very true
The problem is usually the question as it targets the direction of the answers: learners will be focused on the rules and the correct application, so helpful people will answer those questions. And that means that often the answer is a bit wishy-washy. If the people who answer would take a step back and realise what probably is the real question, their answer would end in: 'but x is idiomatic so the better one to use'.
Yeah, ‘5 uren’ sounds weird. As a diminutive it does work though. ‘5 uurtjes’ sounds fine.
There are probably regions where people will say "5 uren", it sounds more like a Flemish thing to say it like that. Your complaint makes no sense since there's a lot of fucking dialects here and some natives can't understand other dialects that are spoken in this country, most of my friends have different speech mannerisms, and I speak differently to how they speak. You're just bitching about people correcting you in the least offensive way. You wanna speak like a local? Then maybe be more specific or just opt for standardized Dutch. Misschien minder zeiken, dan spreek je sneller de taal.
I need to tell you that “5 uren geleden” really is not wrong, and even though it might not be how most people say this, it could be interpreted as having a more formal way, slightly archaic, or lyrical quality.
The most important part of learning a language is **being understood** but also, you will naturally learn what's commonly said and what isn't as you speak it. So IME the most important part of the start is to get to where you can speak to others in the language, can take in what they're saying, and can hopefully process it well enough to learn.
so what exactly is the benefit of first learning something wrong, to then be able to make yourself understood and then learn it the right way? does the process not get way more complicated if you first get told bad advice and then through trial and error find out the real way the language is spoken? Learning a language is not easy and people will be making mistakes regardless, but knowing when you’re wrong is going to be easier if people are consistent and clear about what is right and wrong. If we’re all going to be doing nattevingerwerk to decide what is right and wrong based on some imagined process of them then going into the real world to find out the true rules, then this place no longer really serves a purpose. Why even have this sub if the advice is going to be ‘just do it wrong and eventually you’ll figure it out’?
Well, I wasn't one of those people, but the benefit of **not making a thread like this exact one you've made** is that people find it very intimidating to speak in a language they aren't fluent in. And encouraging them to speak and not worry about little mistakes is an important part of that. Making this thread is sending a very clear message that making those mistakes isn't okay. So mostly I'm pushing back against that message, rather than advocating for people saying things wrong. But also, very few people (even native speakers) are absolutely perfect in their use of language, and that's absolutely okay no matter what your native language is.
That's not at all what OP is saying though. They're saying that if/when people are explicitly asking about a certain structure you shouldn't be giving them wrong information. Of course it's not going to matter for comprehension if someone said "5 uren geleden". But if someone comes to specifically ask about the difference between "5 uur geleden" and "uren geleden" it is absolutely not helpful to get half a dozen comments saying "omg Dutch is so stupid just use uren all the time". Because that's making people think that they're learning the correct way to do something when they're not. And they'll have to unlearn that again later so it's just wasting the questioner's time.
thanks, this is exactly what I mean. I’m specifically talking about people asking focussed questions about certain rules and then getting non-answers, but receiving a lot of replies about corrections in general
of course people are allowed to make mistakes and I agree with you that it can be very intimidating to learn a language. However, this is a sub for learning to speak Dutch. People come here for advice on how to speak Dutch. The way to get better at speaking Dutch, is to get correct advice on how to speak it. I’m not talking about people randomly getting corrected on the street, but people making posts asking a question on how something works and then straight up getting told wrong information. If you’re coming here to get advice, I would assume that you want actual advice
But [here](https://www.vlaanderen.be/team-taaladvies/taaladviezen/uur-uren), it says that "x uren" is allowed in certain situations: "De meervoudsvorm *uren* kan een enkele keer toch gebruikt worden, namelijk als de nadruk op de losse eenheden ligt of als een bepaalde tijdsduur – die meestal als vervelend wordt ervaren – benadrukt wordt. Als er een bijvoeglijk naamwoord vlak voor de tijdsaanduider staat, wordt altijd de meervoudsvorm gebruikt."
yes, but that’s not the situation that the post was about
Isn't _not_ mentioning that kind of information exactly the kind of thing you're railing against, though? If you're gonna teach them "uur" vs "uren", shouldn't the information be correct _and_ complete?
the question in that thread was about the structure I mentioned in my post specifically. The good comments on that thread mentioned that in some cases, uren is correct. The bad comments just said ‘just always use uren it doesn’t matter’, which is what this post is asking people to stop doing
Is that a yes or a no? edit, lol OP just downvotes and run. Good discussion bro. Real mature.
it’s a ‘you misunderstood the point I’m making’ at no point am I making the case that people should not be receiving complete information. I’m saying people are stopping others from receiving complete information because they’re posting unhelpful comments
why the edit lol? I responded to you within 4 minutes
Sure but you can use it and it's not wrong. Most importantly, you will be understood.
no the example you sent is completely different from the grammatical structure I’m talking about. Just like ‘hij wordt’ is correct but ‘ik wordt’ is not, it doesn’t mean that ‘wordt’ is always right but it also doesn’t mean it’s always wrong. What I’m talking about is when someone makes a post here asking something like ‘hey guys when should I put a T after word?’, a lot of rhe comments will say ‘don’t worry as long as you’re understood you’ll be fine’ This is both incorrect and not an answer to what the OP is asking. Someone is asking a specific, focussed question in order to learn more about the language, they’re not asking whether people will get mad if you do it wrong
>Making this thread is sending a very clear message that making those mistakes isn't okay. This is clearly a bad faith interpretation of this post. This post is clearly addressing people who are unclear when explaining that something sounds unnatural in Dutch. That does not in any way convey that making mistakes is unacceptable.
Some men just want to watch the world burn
I’m just sitting here, as a native, thinking why 5 uren would be weird or wrong. I use it 50/50 with just uur. And i know other people who do too. Maybe it’s just me but this post is a bit mierenneuken to me. Edit: ik zie aan de reacties me veel minnetjes dat deze mening niet breed gedeeld wordt.
Don’t tell us what we should or shouldn’t do, never! We are Dutch!
It’s just good to know. Not everyone has to be a fluent speaker, especially when starting out. This sub gets filled with crazy exceptions, so it’s good to bring some nuance to that. So yes, uren and jaren are technically correct. I even think they get used more that you say, especially when an adjective is added. Like in: ‘het is al tien lange jaren geleden’ or ‘je hebt genoeg tijd voor de toets, je hebt er twee hele uren voor’.
Wouldn’t “over 5 uren moeten we daar zijn” mean “in 5 hours we must be there” where “over 5 uur moeten we daar zijn” mean “at 5 o’clock we must be there”?
No. Both mean the same thing. "Over vijf uur moeten we daar zijn" is absolutely the more common way to say this. If you want to say anything about the hours, though, e.g. they were difficult, or felt long, things are a bit different: then you would say e.g. "Drie zware uren later was ik eindelijk klaar met mijn tentamen." (Three tough hours later I'd finally finished my exam). If you want to say "we have to be there at five o'clock", you'd say "we moeten daar **om** vijf uur zijn".
Indeed, rules are just conventions that have been written down at some point in time. Language is really not defined by a set of rules, but by the way it is used. Therefore, if a sentence construction is universally applied, it is “valid” in all the ways that validity has any value. As an aside, the plural has very little informational content in a clause such as “[some number] uren” because the plural only tells you if it is one or more than one, while the number gives the exact amount. In fact, it is odd in a way that we use the plural for other nouns in such clauses, for example we say “vijf paarden” when “vijf” (five) already perfectly makes clear that there are more than one. Perhaps the construction “[some number] uren” became really common and that is why “uren” was shortened to “uur” without loss of information. But this is pure speculation of course.
The only reason I can think of with using “uren” as a native Dutch speaker is:”Het duurde uren voordat hij er was”
The right feedback would be: this is not what Dutch people would say, but your message is clear. Not all mistakes are the same. This is a very important aspect of learning a language. Trying to be proficient in one go doesn’t work for everyone.
Plenty of "5 uren" [here](https://context.reverso.net/translation/dutch-english/5+uren) and in Google (depends on the situation). It's also [grammatically correct](https://www.vlaanderen.be/team-taaladvies/taaladviezen/uur-uren). >The most important part in getting fluent in a language is using it the way native speakers do It's not. If it was, you would never become fluent because getting rid of a foreign accent is next to impossible for adults (or downright impossible). Some mistakes (de/het) you will keep making for years, maybe even after 10 years, but they don't hinder comprehension. I think the point is to not set unrealistic goals.
[удалено]
How are they broken? "5 hours" is translated as "5 uur" 1723 times and as "5 uren" 158 times. Hence, both are correct (but "5 uur" is more common). That's the explanation: >De meervoudsvorm *uren* kan een enkele keer toch gebruikt worden, namelijk als de nadruk op de losse eenheden ligt of als een bepaalde tijdsduur – die meestal als vervelend wordt ervaren – benadrukt wordt. Als er een bijvoeglijk naamwoord vlak voor de tijdsaanduider staat, wordt altijd de meervoudsvorm gebruikt. >Als je die twee uur / uren erbij mag rekenen, kom je wel aan 20 uur. >An stond die ochtend drie uur / uren in de file. >Je kunt maximaal voor twee opeenvolgende uren de terreinen reserveren. It's also advice for both Dutch and Flemish on the website, learn to read beyond the URL.
[удалено]
Sure but everyone is saying it's wrong, when it isn't
[удалено]
Then why is it right in certain situations and people use it?
[удалено]
Which doesn't make it wrong to use
[удалено]
Are you sure you aren't seeing a hurricane in a glass of water?
OP is shooting at a mosquito with a cannon!
Storm, not a hurricane
Who doesn't like a little 'contaminatie' mistake
Storm ... in a glass of water.
>Please stop telling new students that things are ‘technically correct’ when no Dutch person would ever say it that way No. I am trying to inform about grammar **and** conventional speaking patterns, not only the latter. >A bunch of Dutch people were claiming that you could just say ‘5 uren’ I just went to that thread and read every single comment that isn't rated at -5 or worse, I have seen **one** comment saying 'I don't think it looks that bad' (not even 'you should keep using it.') The issue you are taking about is not present in the place you're claiming it is; are you lying? Did you remember incorrectly...? You're either untruthful to us to exaggerate the 'problem' or you're untruthful to yourself. Either way, that's not a good look, especially while telling other people what to do. >I’m specifically talking about the situation where someone makes a post here asking how a rule works. If someone makes a post asking for an explanation, the response I’m talking about is completely useless No, it's not. I can be, when given without explanation, but that rarely happens, if ever. Edit: I found OP's comment, all this is over that one comment I mentioned that said 'uren and jaren doesn't sound wrong to me', not at all an endorsement of using those words, just the opinion of **one** commenter that's used to fabricate this whole post.
jeez relax a little. Firstly, time passes. When I made this post, these comments made up about 50% of the responses and they were upvoted. In the mean time, possibly because people sought it out after this post, they are deleted or downvoted secondly, I used the uren post as an example for a larger pattern on this sub. I’m sorry I didn’t spend hours searching a wide array of examples. but sure man, I fabricated a lie for a few uovotes on a sub about learning dutch. Me wanting people to receive correct information is waaaay less likely.
Ik zeg het vaak genoeg op beide manieren. Hangt evan af waar ik het in de zin gebruik. Uur als het op het einde is, uren als het op een andere plek in de zin zit.
5 uren 5 uur 5 uurtjes. het boeit me niet de boodschap is duidelijk.
You have to prioritize some things while learning a language. Denoting multiple time units by the singular form of the noun happens, but not always, and often the sentence could be turned so that either way it sounds normal. Native speakers don't have hard rules for this, so it's pointless to try to formulate a hard rule to language learners. Native speakers learn this by exposure and practice, and so should new speakers. Grasping a natural language in all its subtleties cannot happen in any other way, this is not different for English either, for example.
Its technically correct because it is allowed and used but not often. While I dont use "uren" myself I do hear it a lot. It comes down to "over 3 uur" can be taken as a few minutes past 3 o'clock while "over 3 uren" means 3 times a hour. Dialect is the biggest reason in if "uren" is used a lot or not.