"I write that I am warm."
Translation:Ik schrijf dat ik het warm heb.
'Het ... hebben' refers to the feeling a person has. 'Wij hebben het warm' - 'We are warm'.
'Warm zijn' refers to something being warm. If a car has been standing in the sun all day, you would say: 'The car is warm!' - 'De auto is warm'.
Saying 'Ik ben warm' means that you literally are warm. For example: you have a fever, you touch your forehead and say 'Ik ben warm', refering to the heat of your forehead instead of the feeling of having it warm.
So how can we tell from the English sentence that ik ben warm, as in being feverish, is not what the person is writing about?
Is "het" in this phrase ("ik het warm heb") required? It seems strange to me and if I google "ik warm heb" or "ik heb warm" I do see results, so I'm not sure what the difference is when using the article vs. not.
(I wrote "...dat ik warm heb" and it wasn't accepted, but I'm curious.)
Reading the response above now that I'm awake(!), it looks like the issue is that the Dutch is unambiguous as to whether it's a state or a subjective sense ("hebben" vs "het...hebben") but it's a bit ambiguous when given the English sentence first, as we can say "I'm warm" in both senses -- think a sick person touching their forehead and saying "I'm really warm."
Because 'dat' in this situation is a subordinating conjunction which forces the main verb to the end of the second phrase. I think the idea here is that "ik schrijf" is the main sentence and the following part is the added clause.