1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Het is warm, dus wij gaan zw…

"Het is warm, dus wij gaan zwemmen."

Translation:It is warm, so we are going swimming.

July 27, 2014



Is it correct to say that here "dus" works like "en" and "maar" and that is why the verb is not sent to the end?


Exactly - there is another one that doesn't send the verb to the end: want (but omdat does send the verb to the end)


These are coordinating conjunctions, see the tips for Conj. 1. Lesson:


Relevant section: The common Dutch coordinating conjunctions are: en, of, maar, want and dus.

There are only five of them, so learn these by heart! In comparison, there are many different subordinating conjunctions. Those bring along complicated rules for word order in subordinate clauses and are treated in a later skill.

So if you are using these 5 coordinating conjunctions, word order does not change: en, of, maar, want and dus.


Maybe "Dus" could be translated to "thus" too ? adding this translation would help English speakers very much I think, though I presume they made the connection themselves.


Thus already is an accepted translation.


How about: "Because it is warm, we are going to swim"? My instincs say that that would be the sentence used for this by most English speakers.


This is tricky. In American English, at least, we would more likely say "We are going swimming." But this is not in the future tense. It is the present continuous that indicates a future action, like "We are having a big party next week."

Strictly speaking, "We are going to swim," is future tense. So for the purposes of this translation, it's more accurate.

And try this on for size: "Because it is warm, we are going to go swimming." It would not be unusual to hear that around these parts (except it would sound like "... we are gonna go swimming"). That is because "to go swimming" is a set verb phrase that means, basically, to engage in the act of swimming. We also do this with other activities, like dancing, fishing, etc. In our minds, then, "go swimming" feels like a single verb, so it seems perfectly natural to use "going to go swimming" for the future tense.


Why can't we say: "It is hot so we go swimming."?

  • 508

Because the Dutch word for hot is heet. :)


Oddly, on mobile, the only choice it gave me was "hot" and it accepted it. Sounds like it needs fixing


Thanks! I asked because one of the choices was hot so... I guess the solution is to always pick the first choice, which was in fact warm. Thanks for responding.


Is this acceptable: "It is warm, so we go to swim"? It sounds okay to me, but I'm not sure.


I don't think there's any problem with that grammatically, but it's not how a native English speaker would phrase it. I think the problem is that "go to" is usually followed by a place, so it looks odd when followed by a verb. With verbs we usually use "go <gerund>" or "go and <infinitive>" instead, or sometimes "go to <place> to <infinitive>" (if we want to explain why we're going to the place).


I think it is indeed wrong, because in "go to", "to" is not the infinitive marker but a preposition, which can't be followed by the infinitive, so "go to swimming" would rather be grammatically correct.


Chili13, what you are trying to say is:
It is warm, so we are going to swim.


Couldn't 'wij gaan zwemmen' here also be traslated as a future tense? We're going to swim/We will swim?


I agree: wij gaan zwemmen == we will swim


The English "we are going swimming" does imply a future tense, even though it doesn't look that way grammatically. You wouldn't say it if you were actually swimming now. You might be on your way to swim, or you could be referring to some time in the future - for example, you could say "we are going swimming tomorrow."

"We're going to swim" and "we will swim" should be fine, but they seem a bit less natural to me.


"We're going swimming" certainly does imply a future action.


Why won't it accept 'we' instead of 'wij'? If it's about stress, then I feel like this sentence definitely stresses the verb 'zwemmen' and NOT the pronoun.


It should accept 'we', unless it was a type-what-you-hear exercise.


Thank you for your reply! I cannot remember to be honest, however it is definitely difficult to hear the differences in stress. So it's possible that it said 'wij' but I heard 'we'.


To me it said "wij". :)


In Bacardi Lemon

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