Trying to distinguish the difference in usage between "van" and "uit." Could "van" be used here? (Iedereen houdt van bier van België)
Appreciate the chart! Hadn't seen that before. It's helpful. So it seems like "bier van België" could be used, though I'm guessing probably less likely here since there is already a "van" elsewhere in the sentence and "uit" is probably preferable.
And then I also found that you could say "Belgische bier[en]" (Belgian beer[s]), so apparently there's some flexibility as far as I can tell.
Actually you can't use "bier van België" but "Belgisch bier" is fine.
You do use "van" in sentences like: "Dit is bier van het winkeltje op de hoek" (This is beer from the small shop on the corner) or "De wijn is van vorig jaar" (The wine is from last year).
Ik begrijp dat**. Dank u wel. So "van" and "uit" can both have the sense of "from" but are just used in different contexts, which I'm assuming will just come with practice?
**I've also seen "Dat begrijp ik" instead. Just curious if one is preferable to the other?
"Dat begrijp ik" would be the normal way to express this.
Lots of practice ;)
Getting off topic here. I think it is because "dat" gets the emphasis. So "Ik begrijp het" but "Dat begrijp ik" and "Dat wil ik".
To clarify "Het begrijp ik" is wrong. The other sentences (without "dat" in front) are just less natural.
@Multitaal Got it. Is there any kind of rule governing why you would normally say "Dat begrijp ik" putting 'dat' first and using inversion, or is it just 'the way you say it' here?
Would you, for example, say "Het begrijp ik" (I understand it) or "Dat wil ik" (I want that)? Curious if it has anything to with the pronoun 'dat' or verb 'begrijpen.'
Understood. Not trying to stray to far from the thread, but I appreciate your response. A lingot for your troubles! :)