1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Wij hebben de kip niet betaa…

"Wij hebben de kip niet betaald."

Translation:We have not paid for the chicken.

August 1, 2014



Can you say "Wij hebben voor de kip niet betaald" to clarify that you are not giving money to a chicken?


Yes, that's fine. And English word order also works fine: "Wij hebben niet betaald voor de kip".


Are both these word orders correct (or are one used more often than the other)?

Wij hebben de kip niet betaald.

Wij hebben niet betaald de kip.


As far as I understand, your second sentence would be infrequently used, even wrong.


I was confused by that as well. After all, you never know, with Duolingo...


I just said "we didn't pay the chicken" and it was accepted, is this right?


Seconded. Is "wij hebben de kip niet betaald" right for "we didn't pay the chicken?" Thanks.


Thirded. It's the downside of having those silly sentences elsewhere (ik ben een appel!/Hij brengt altijd zijn muis), I suppose--how is this not "We have not paid the chicken"?


the chicken mafia is coming for you all!


"Woe betide he who shortchangeth the chicken..."


S.b. "woe betide him"


Maybe the speaker was frequenting the Chicken Ranch?


It's all fine! There should be a "voor" somewhere but Duolingo accepts both anyway.


as far as english goes... they are two very different sentences, I cannot comment on the dutch side of things


Hey so when a verb starts with be or ge or ver do you just like take the "ik" form and add a -d at the end? Like in German it's like verpassen --> verpasst... is it kinda like that?


Yes, as in German, inseparable verbs take no "ge-" in the past participle.


What is acting as the word "for" here? Is it connected with "betaald"?


It's a distinction English makes: you pay a bill/an account, but you pay for [something you purchase]. You can find a couple more examples in http://www.mijnwoordenboek.nl/vertaal/NL/EN/betalen: u hoeft dit niet te betalen. - you don't have to pay for this ("*you don't have to pay this" would be wrong if it was referring to something purchased, but it would be correct if it was a bill).


It's really confusing. In portuguese we do not need a preposition to state that the chicken is what we are buying. We do need a preposition when we refer whom we are paying to. But colloquially this preposition is dropped and the context shows if the chicken is being bought or if he/she is the one that is receving the money.


It is the same in Italian. No preposition needed.

Non abbiamo pagato il pollo = We have not paid for the chicken.


So "betaal" alone means "pay for" in Dutch? Do we need a preposition as well?


It means “pay” but, idiomatically, they don’t need a preposition. French does the same.

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