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
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)
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
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)..
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!! ;)
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.
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.
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.
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,