1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Het heeft gisteren in Nederl…

"Het heeft gisteren in Nederland geregend."

Translation:It rained in the Netherlands yesterday.

August 3, 2014



haha, no kidding, it rained in the Netherlands yesterday! and the day before that! and the day before that! and the day before that! and probably tomorrow too!


het is aan het regenen terwijl ik schrijf (hope it's correct haha)


what is wrong with "It has rained in the Netherlands yesterday"?


You find that at the very end of duo's explanation:

"In Dutch it is common to use the present perfect together with an adjective which specifies a time in the past, something that is not allowed in English. In these cases, you must use the simple past in your translation. “Ik heb gisteren hard gewerkt.” -> I worked hard yesterday. WRONG: I have worked hard yesterday."


You simply don't use the present participle when referring to a specific period in the past in English.


He didn't use the present participle. His question wasn't about present participles.

Also, what you said about present participles is not true.


I actually meant the past participle form of the verb and the present perfect tense. I am sorry if I used the wrong term. If you still think I am wrong, please give examples of what you meant.


Ok, so you were talking about the present perfect. Then it sounds right, the present perfect tense is not used when referring to a specific period in the past in English. However I think the the past participle and the present participle can be.

(modified from https://www.learnenglish.de/grammar/participlepast.html). It can be used to form the passive voice. - Her hair was well brushed when I saw her yesterday. It can also be used as an adjective. - He had a broken arm when I saw him yesterday.

(modified from https://www.learnenglish.de/grammar/participlepresent.html) We were running through the woods yesterday.


I agree with jamesjiao. You just wouldn't say that in English, at least not where I come from.


See above. I do not agree with it as well. It is strange


Why not "It rained yesterday in the netherlands" ?! this seems like a reasonable answer to me, but wasn't accepted.


Why my answer is incorrect? it was raining in the Nederlands yesterday


Duolingo tips states that the present perfect with a time adjective cannot be used in English. The owl needs to bone up on his English. Sentences like, "... has rained yesterday", are used to issue emphatic disagreement. -- It did not rain in the Netherlands yesterday. -- Has your memory completely failed you? It most certainly has rained all over the Netherlands yesterday.


could this sentence be somehow rephrased using "er"?


Yes, you can say: "Het heeft ER gisteren geregend" But than nobody knows where it (always) rains. It is better to use it in the conversation which follows: "Het heeft gisteren in Nederland geregend. Echt? Heeft het ER weer geregend?" = It rained in the Netherlands yesterday. Really? Has it rained again? By the way "Holland" is famous for his green grass-lands, because of the rain that falls on peat-moor. The other part of the Netherlands has a sand ground.


One thing that kinda confuses me; the D at the end of a word sounds like a T (at least to my non-Dutch ears), how does one know which one is using when speaking (and not writing) Dutch? Or does it sound the same?


The -d at the end of any Dutch word tends to sounds like a -t.

Many people are not even aware that in English the -ed at the end of any verb is pronounced -t if it follows a voiceless consonant (e.g. k, t, p). At least Dutch spelling is more consistent. Remember the mnemonics: soft ketchup or 't kofschip.


Why do they alway use the imperfect forms in english when the past perfect is used in the dutch sentence? Every answer is marked as false... Strange


You always use the past in English when something happened yesterday or in the past, when the case is closed! You use perfect when something just has happened, just a moment ago...


No truer statement was ever said.


It has rained in the Netherlands yesterday, is this correct too?


Yes, of course...


what is the problem with "in Holland". Why is only "in the NETHERLANDS" allowed


Holland are two provinces in the Netherlands (North-Holland and South-Holland), most people from the other provinces would never say they are from Holland, because they are not.


Thanks ... in the Dutch context, I knew that. However, in [Canadian] English we often say "Holland" to mean the whole country.


I know and it's not just in English, loads of languages generally use some form of Holland for the whole country. But we shouldn't do things incorrectly just because half the world is doing it wrong. :)


Coincidentally, so does the official Netherlands tourism website (holland.com), in it appears all languages (even Belgium French) except Dutch.


True, but that website is aimed at attracting non-Dutch people to visit the country (possibly for a short period of time), whereas our course is about learning Dutch. When you're learning the language you already show some interest in and know something of the culture and history of the country, since the Dutch language is not isolated from the rest of Dutch culture and history. In Dutch the distinction between Nederland and Holland is important, so we (the course builders) feel Dutch students should be aware of the distinction. Being less tolerant in accepting these answers is a way of teaching this.

FYI People from many parts of the Netherlands can be (somewhat) offended to be called Hollander when they are not, similar to calling the Welsh or Scottish English.


@Susande (since I think we've hit the reply chain max)

I don't think I disagree with anything you're saying, I just finding it highly amusing that the misconception is so widespread, and yet even the Dutch government is helping perpetuate it. Even the Belgian French translation uses Hollande!


Well, I can agree with that; it's a use of "pars pro toto"; not always justified, as are so many things that have become part of the language (e.g. using "lay" for "lie"' in English; "legen" and liegen" are still distinguished in Dutch and German). This English language change really bothers me, as does incorrect use of "who" and "whom"; and use of nominative case after prepositions.


this is like "America". You, as Canadian, live in America (North America). I am Chilean, so I am from America too (South America), but the people of The United States of North America like to call themselves Americans... This is the same: Holland is not The Netherlands, but Holland (North and South) are part of The Netherlands


I do agree with that to a certain extent, and I thought of it myself when I read this thread, but our ancestors sort of did us a disservice in naming our country. What are we supposed to call ourselves? United Statesians? USAians? Uniteders? Most countries have a useful ethnic or linguistic group to call themselves by; we don't.


United States citizens (the most appropriate in my opinion), US-Americans, Yankees...

By the way, Spanish (even from Spain) call you "Estado Unidenses", which is how you could have tried to name yourselves: United Statesians. But of course, it sounds awkward since you haven't used it ever, but I can tell you that in Spain it doesn't sound weird, so I'm pretty sure if you tried, it would have been normal.


As I understand it, our states were intended to be sovereign nations bound by a sort of treaty similar to the EU. Considering that, it would be more proper for me to refer to myself as a Missourian than an American.


Holland is also a district in the English county of Lincolnshire.


Not to mention the president of France, (François) Hollande.


And a town in Michigan of course.

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