1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Wij praatten over het bos."

"Wij praatten over het bos."

Translation:We talked about the forest.

July 29, 2014



When soeaking with native Dutch people is there any obvious difference between "pratten" and "praatten" (talk and talked)?


Hi there! No, praten and praatten sound exactly the same when spoken. You have to hear it in context to understand if the person is speaking in the present or past tense.

It's a little like the english words "bet" or "quit".

For example: I bet you (didn't hear me just now) vs. I bet you (yesterday you wouldn't do it); or I quit smoking (starting today) vs. I quit smoking (yesterday).

The advantage in Dutch is that in the written form there is no misunderstanding of when the "talking/speaking" takes place, since the conjugated forms of praten have different spellings. For example:

"Wij praten met de ouders" -- We are talking with the parents "Wij praatten met de ouders" -- We talked with the parents

Though they both sound exactly the same when spoken.

Hope this helps.


The problem is - there is no context in thes exercises. In a listening exercise it is impossible to understand which one it is. Makes it a tricky exercise


Bos like bosque in Spanish. Easy way to remember.


'wood' or 'woods' is the normal expression for 'bos'. I don't think there is any 'bos' in the Netherlands big enough to be called a 'forest'!! 'Woods' is accepted but 'wood' isn't. Why not? The difference between a 'wood' and a 'forest' is principally size.


Wij praten over het bos


That's what I wrote just to see if it would be accepted since this is a Type what you hear exercise. It didn't.


I am sure this is the correct one as well

[deactivated user]

    I put "We talked about the wood", and Duolingo told me I should have put "woods". If the singular "forest" is correct, why does "wood" (in the sense of a collection of trees) have to be plural?


    I agree - 'wood' in the singular for me is the natural term for a collection of trees, much more natural than 'forest' (also from the UK)


    In English "woods" is plural word despite it referring to 1 thing. Kind of like the words "glasses" or "pants." We use a plural word to refer to both the singular and plural forms. The non-plural "wood" does not have the same meaning as "bos."

    In Dutch there are separate words for the singular and plural forms. e.g. singular glasses: "bril"; plural glasses: "brillen"

    Hope this makes sense!

    [deactivated user]

      I think you have missed my point - I probably was unclear! What I meant was that the singular English word "Wood" is sometimes used, at least hear in the UK, for an area covered by trees. This is reflected in the names some woods in this country have. There were woods near my home town of Colchester called "Friday Woods", but the place where A. A, Milne's "Winnie the Pooh" lived was "The Hundred Acre Wood". That is what I meant when I wrote that "wood" should be accepted. It is perfectly correct in English to say "a wood".

      [deactivated user]

        'Wood' should be allowed.


        What is the difference between wood and forest?


        Forest is usually considered larger than a wood.


        So I mispelled forest with 2 r's and was given incorrect.. ?

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