I'm sorry, but your example sentence made me wonder: when the verb is the last word in a sentence, shouldn't it be in its infinitive form? So, it would be "[...] dat ik tegen corruptie zijn", wouldn't it? Please correct me if I'm wrong :). And thanks for your explanation about the tegen! =)
Sentences typically have a conjugated verb. They may or may not also have an infinitive as a complement to the conjugated verb. Examples:
I go downstairs
I go to sleep
The first sentence above has no complement. The second has an adverb as a complement. The third has an infinitive as a complement.
The subject of a sentence usually is followed by a conjugated verb, which must agree with the subject (for example, "I go" but "He goes").
An infinitive can also be used on its own as a subject. For example, "To love is a wonderful thing".
shouldn't the verb be placed in the second part of the sentence ALWAYS except if it was in a form of a question then it comes first? i would have thought that the sentence should be : ik ben tegen corruptie . sorry getting really confused here , maybe you can help explain ? thanks
"Ik zeg tegen hem dat ik tegen corruptie ben."
tamara, is that the sentence you are asking about?
If so, please note that that sentence has two parts. There is a main clause "Ik zeg tegen hem" and there is a subordinate clause "dat ik tegen corruptie ben".
The rule for word order in a main clause and the rule for word order in a subordinate clause are different. In a main clause, the conjugated verb comes in second place, as you say. But in a subordinate clause, the verb(s) move to the end of the clause.
I do not recall "tegen" being mentioned as also meaning "to"
DL does not usually "mention" things at all (except sometimes in the Tips and Notes (which PC users can see, but smartphone users cannot).
Instead, DL just brings on the sentences, and by considering them, you figure out what is going on.
Some people like the DL approach because it spares us wordy descriptions of grammar. Others don't like the DL approach; they feel it is unfair and causes them to lose hearts or whatever.
Personally, I like using DL for practice, but I go elsewhere (including the discussion pages) for explanations of grammar and usage.
In the Dutch sentence here, "mij" is not an indirect object. Rather, it is an object of the preposition "tegen".
A true indirect object is used without any preposition at all. It is only word order (or in some languages, case) that identifies it as an indirect rather than a direct object. For example:
He gives me a pencil.
Hij geeft me een potlood.
In the above, "me" is an indirect object.
I don't get many in these nordic languages that I can answer, but this one is tense. You wrote 'said' which past tense, but 'zeggen' is present tense to 'say' might work. Depends whether zeggen is both say and tell, two meanings in English so possibly also in Danish. tell being to somebody(s) as opposed to scatter broadcast with tell.
Although the dictionaries give tegen as against/at/about, English simply does not use at in the context of an action happening towards a person, or maybe even a thing. We simply do not say I give at you this book, but the Dutch concept is tegen. So the dictionaries need to add tegen = to in the restricted sense of action towards a person. I have found in all my language courses, that at times the translations or clues are a bit awkward in English. And, I'm sure, some of my translations in the opposite direction have been just as bad. Hope this clarifies the mud