Meer or weer, was or werd?
I was on the app so I couldn't post a discussion about this sentence and I never saw the sentence on the website so I'm posting this in discussions. The sentence was: It was never seen again I wrote: Het was nooit al gezien (I meant weer instead of al). I was wrong and the correct sentence was: Het werd nooit meer gezien. I was wondering why it's meer instead of weer and werd instead of was. I haven't been practicing for awhile so I probably just need a refresher on werd/was.
Regarding why it's 'nooit meer' and not 'nooit weer':
In Dutch the words nooit and meer are (often) used together as an expression. A sentence such as 'Never more music' in English can have multiple meanings:
• That there is not more music than at some given moment in time.
• Wishing that there is not more music than there is/was.
• Or: that there never shall be music anymore/again.
In Dutch, nooit meer has the last meaning in your sentence.
If you were to use the word nooit and weer together in the combination nooit weer, then it has another meaning, which is in:
• 'Nu eens, maar nooit weer' (a Dutch expression), means: 'For once, but never again', i.e. something happened and you don't like it to happen again. It doesn't necessarily have a strongly negative connotation, though sometimes used that way.
My thoughts are: 1) The passive sentence goes with "word/worden" in present and "werd/werden" in past. 2) "Meer" or "weer" depends on a verb, just like soemtimes you use "ben/is/zijn" instead of "heb/heeft/hebben" in the present perfect tense.
Besides "Het werd nooit meer gezien." (past) you could also say "Het is nooit meer gezien" (present), but all depends on the context and the correct use of present or past. Confusing here is the use of "werd" (from the verb "worden" (become)) in past and "is" (from the verb "zijn" (being))... Who ever said Dutch was easy...