1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "De hond eet het konijn."

"De hond eet het konijn."

Translation:The dog is eating the rabbit.

July 18, 2014



This course just turned dark


I agree this was very sad .....


I hope the rabbit is okay.


I highly doubt the hypothetical rabbit is okay after being hypothetically consumed by a dog. But this is hypothetical, so the rabbit and the dog don't really exist, and therefore can't hypothetically eat each other. I like using big words I don't understand to make myself sound more photosynthesis. XD


I was tempted to put "the dog hugs the rabbit".


I typed "The dog eets the rabbit." Dutch is really rubbing off on me!


I once translated ik eet niet as 'I eat not'.

*sigh* I'm forgetting my native language haha....

derKleineNerd9, they/them


Now I am sad... Do the majority of animals take het, or is just a coincidence with the ones we are learning?


there is a thread describing and explaining the rules of "de" and "het" https://www.duolingo.com/comment/3732938


That was very helpful, Thanks! Is there any source that we can get this such info? I mean a link to explained grammars of Dutch?


I grew up in Netherlands and I still found it confusing


Sounds to me almost like the spanish conejo


You mean look like the Spanish conejo (not that I am aware there is a separate rabbit species there)? Or did you mean to say the word shares the same root as the Spanish word for rabbit, in which case yes.


it's the difference between "hare" / jackrabbit / rabbit / bunny and "coney" / bunny / rabbit

in German you have "Hase" and "Kaninchen"

(not sure if other Slavic languages use the same words but there's "Kunac" and "Zec" [coo-nuts; zèts] (long/flat e) I should use phonetic letters, not sound crazy like this)

and now a story no one might care about

I was standing there, with someone and through the window I saw a .. -that animal here-

on the grass outside

I was like "Oh, da ist ein Hase."

so that person went "Was soll da sein? Ts, ts, das ist ein Kanickel, es gibt hier keine Hasen." (disbelief, skeptical, contrary)

he wanted to correct me that I lacked the definition, and probably didn't know that you rarely saw any hares around this area it's connected to urban/suburban here but a lot of forests around, even in the mid-city you'll see greens anywhere, you see foxes come here (a bit off center I am), a fox won't go to town, don't worry .. and if they do then probably because they have no choice, but if you lock a fox up somewhere they panic immediately...

that's what I added to our conversation to prove him that it might still be a "Hase"

however: what I saw had -long- ears, that stand up straight, legs that indicate the animal ran more and jumped better or higher.. and had those eyes that sort of poke out.. not like a frog's eyes but almost

in order to be sure I looked it up the next day

"Hase" lives like a totally wild animal and also just has a "hideout" somewhere, in bushes, between rocks..

while "Kaninchen" were commonly used for domestication, which doesn't mean there are not wild ones existing in nature

but the difference is: the wild "Kaninchen" live in little dens, don't move too far from their home, their ears are not as long or at times hang down the eyes are really inside the holes, not standing out slightly

all of that indicates that a "Hase" lives on a field for example or on plains, while Kaninchen are the more "relaxed" type of animal which also don't run as fast and are more of a "home body" ^^ they return to their den to make sure their little ones are safe, and in danger they generally seek refuge there

while a "Hase" just outruns their predators in zig-zag patterns and jumps, (the legs seem a bit longer and the "thighs" seems stronger) and then hides somewhere, and when the coast is clear, life goes on...

don't know what the different terms in Dutch might be, but this one sounds like "Kanickel", while it's confusing enough that "canine" rather is related to the "fangs" .. or the position of teeth you have.. or canine in general is wolf-dog related terminology)


Ok... not sure why you replied to my comment with that.. but thanks I guess. It's more the etymology that I was replying on..


I made it become too much.. but I wondered why he wants to fool me if he can't see that animal (in the very late evening) and therefore gets bias telling me I didn't know what I -was- seeing - no "meaningful anecdotes" intended or anything, just an addition if anybody wondered about those definitions .. I'm not even sure if most English speakers would be strict about whether it's Hare or Coney

it's just that I looked it up because I wansn't 100% sure back then, that's why I didn't contradict any further, also because I rather let go at times if the other person is so persistent.. especially about such not as essential things... now I know when I see a "Hase" and that it's not a Dr. K. Nickel like our English books had featured as a drawn character:D


Dutch has
konijn (bunny/rabbit which together almost completely pushed out the older english cony, which is cognate with konijn and ultimately goes back to greek kúniklos) and
haas (hare, the bigger one with long ears which to me always look more like a miniature kangaroo than a bunny so personally I don't mix em up easily)..


Btw Coney Island in new York USA is called that because the Dutch named it the bunny/rabbit island. Konijnen eiland in modern Dutch and the original Conyne Eylant in (early) 17th century Dutch. As written on maps of the time.

[deactivated user]

    And the Welsh "cwningen"


    Cwning was is apparently a loan word from Middle English according to Wiktionary :)


    Why is it de hond, but het konijn and not de konijn?


    It's two different words. I'm afraid I don't know any rule, which is why I just learn all the articles by heart.

    (e.g. I'm German and the words in German even have different genders to the ones in Dutch... So it gets quite confusing at times haha :)

    de hond = der Hund het konijn = der Hase / das Kaninchen de schildpad = die Schildkröte

    So you see that there's no proper rule.

    Have a lingot for your 300 day streak!! ;)

    • 1991

    I see you are learning German. You will notice that the German and the Dutch articles for a word are almost always the same in both languages. The German “das” is the Dutch “het”, the German “die” and “der” are the Dutch “de”.

    der Hund = de hond
    die Katze = de kat
    das Kaninchen = het konijn

    There isn’t any rule that could help you to know when to use which article. But maybe knowing Dutch could help you now find more easily the correct German article.


    How can i tell the difference between " The dog is eating the rabbit" and "The dog eats the rabbit" ?


    Both translations can fit "de hond eet het konijn".

    "The dog is eating the rabbit" could also be translated to "de hond is het konijn aan het (op)eten", to emphasize that it's ongoing, maybe indicating the dog can still be stopped. But I think using the simple "de hond eet het konijn" is more common.


    Why is : 'The dog eats the rabbit' wrong? I.e. Present continous vs simple present. (I am not a native speaker)


    Should be correct, are you sure you didn’t misspell anything? If you didn’t, make sure to report the question next time you see it


    at least the cats are ok


    How can u tell if it's I ate a rabbit or if it's I'm eating a rabbit


    'Ate' would be translated to 'at' and 'eat' would be translated to 'eet'.


    Ik eet een konijn. - present tense

    Ik at een konijn. - past tense


    Wow. The word for rabbit in Dutch and Irish is similar.


    Rubbish! I wrote: the dog eats a rabbit (like the dog eats a rabbit every day) and I got told it was wrong!


    That would be a correct translation if the Dutch sentence was "de hond eet konijn", but it is "het konijn, which is why you have to use the definite article "the".


    You are right: my answer wasn't wrong because of eats/is eating but because of a/the. My fault!


    What's the difference between 'de' and 'het'?


    Dutch words have 2 or 3 genders, as female and male words can usually simply be classified as common gender and they use "de" for "the", the other gender is neuter, which uses "het" for "the". Both genders use "de" in the plural form.


    De man - de mannen (the man - the men)

    De vrouw - de vrouwen (the woman - the women)

    Het kind - de kinderen (the child - the children)

    It is similar to German der/die/das.


    Neuter is actually genderless. Neuter (onzijdig in Dutch) stands for the absence of gender or gender neutral. But I can understand why you are tempted to say that.

    Like if you are sorting chestnut/walnut/no nut. (No pun intended my first example was about colour in a sketchbook but this was clearer)

    Just because you are sorting nuts (dividing genders) and there is a 3rd group, that doesn't make the 3rd group a type of nut.

    In sorting genders there is f/m (though in dutch (and Danish and Swedish) they sort of merged and ended up using the same definite article.) And n which isn't engendered and uses het as the definite article.


    When talking about grammatical gender, neuter is a gender. I know what it means normally, but when talking about grammar it definitely is a gender.


    Sorry but it really isn't. If with "normally" you mean biological gender, that's not what I'm talking about. It's common to see it called a gender. I myself often say it aswell. But officially, linguistically it isn't.

    Neuter really means no (grammatical, I'm talking about grammar) gender. Neither gender. Dutch onzijdig is also not sided with one of the genders. (This likely stems back from the time things were divided into animate and inanimate)

    You sort them by gender, but it's masculine gender, feminine gender, no gender.

    You could argue if no gender is a type of gender if you want to get philosophical/into semantics. But in everyday life we would say it's not,( a dog is a no-cat).

    Like counting ballots, you will have yes, no and empty ballot you divide them by answers but a blank paper isn't really an answer. Ok bad example since people politically use blanks as a form of protest.

    Ok sorting cups by what they are filled with. Some are filled with coffee some are filled with tea some are empty. Eventhough you are sorting by what they are filled with, the last one isn't filled with anything. It is .... not filled (sorting by gender- not gendered)

    In the end it doesn't really matter, people will know what you mean and the majority will probably say it like that. (Because it's sorted by gender. And you almost automatically call it a gender because of that) but if you want to be linguistically correct and get to the bottom of it, Neuter is simply lack of gender/neither gender.

    You sort by gender, feminine, masculine absence of gender.

    It has become so common to call it a gender though,


    I only use Duolingo for the comment section, you guys are hilarious


    Why "de" hond, but "het" konijn?


    Sorry, we have "de words" and "het words" in Dutch, you will just have to memorise. It's like in Spanish words can be masculine or feminine (el or la)


    De hond eet het konijn


    Confused by when to use het instead of de.


    As you can read in many other comments in this post: you will just have to remember which article to use, just like you have to in Spanish.


    Pronounciation of second articke very unclear

    Learn Dutch in just 5 minutes a day. For free.