"Wij eten niet alleen vis, maar ook vlees."

Translation:We eat not only fish, but also meat.

4 years ago

30 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/bikeski

Should "We do not eat only fish, but also meat" be accepted?

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/moidekar
moidekar
  • 25
  • 24
  • 24
  • 24
  • 22
  • 22
  • 11
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2

I don't see why not.

4 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/lukman.A
lukman.A
  • 21
  • 21
  • 17
  • 14
  • 6
  • 5

Yes, it's correct too.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/nair.Varun

No, it cannot be right. With the above sentence, you are implying that "we DO NOT eat fish and meat " but the correct meaning of the given Dutch sentence is that "We eat both fish and meat"

10 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Yurell
Yurell
  • 18
  • 12
  • 4

Their sentence does not imply that in the least. The 'do not' applies to the phrase 'eat only', not to 'eat' in isolation

10 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Raqcity

Why is is the second part of the sentence structured as "maar ook vlees"? Why not "maar vlees ook"?

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/clarissema7

It is saying: "But also meat" because ook is at the middle. When at the final it would be: "but meat too"

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/frons79

MAAR OOK is considered like a unique conjunction (in this example) that's why it's not correct to break it with the Object complement

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/BilalDouay

It's just because of the grammar. Trust me, I am a native Dutch speaker.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Zaftique
Zaftique
  • 14
  • 9
  • 9
  • 6
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2

"We don't eat just fish, but also meat" - why is this wrong? 'Just' is listed as an option, and that phrasing is one that I use all the time.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/clarissema7

I'm not a native, so I am not sure. But I would say "niet alleen" is a combination that forms: not only. Not "not just"

3 years ago

[deactivated user]

    "We don't eat just fish" and "We don't just eat fish" are exactly the same as if one was to use "not only" instead of "don't just". I put in a request to have it changed.. :/ I will admit though, "We don't eat just fish" is a strange way of saying it.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/hectorlqr
    hectorlqr
    • 15
    • 15
    • 14
    • 13
    • 13
    • 12
    • 12
    • 11
    • 10
    • 10
    • 10
    • 9
    • 9
    • 9
    • 8
    • 6
    • 5
    • 5
    • 4
    • 4
    • 2
    • 2
    • 2

    ook <=> auch (German)

    1 year ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/zajac1989
    zajac1989
    • 25
    • 25
    • 22
    • 22
    • 21
    • 6

    This statement is scientifically implausible ;)

    4 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/1Dannyboy1

    Why not "We eat not fish only, but also meat." Certainly acceptable as an English sentence, and a literal (as far as I can tell) translation.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/WarmFoothills

    I am not a native English speaker, but that doesn't sound like a sentence grammatically correct in Standard English to me.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/MokeiAkita

    If I said that, I would rearrange it slightly: "We eat not only fish, but also meat." That appears closer to the Dutch phrasing, but I also prefer it because the first clause implicitly constrains the second clause to refer to things we eat. When the "not only" precedes the verb, the second clause is wide open, and might just as easily be, "We not only eat fish but also kiss babies."

    2 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/MilesNilges
    MilesNilges
    • 12
    • 12
    • 11
    • 9
    • 9
    • 7
    • 7
    • 6
    • 6
    • 2

    It's not incorrect technically, but would flow and sound better as, "We not only eat fish, but..." or " Not only do we eat fish, but..."

    2 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/DeezApples74

    So will 'We don't eat fish alone, but also meat' be okay? I didn't try it. If so, then alleen=alone would be a good clue.

    2 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/klgrona

    Didnt accept "but meat also"............

    1 year ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/Mahshad.

    Isn't "not only we eat fish but also meat" correct?

    1 year ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/Yurell
    Yurell
    • 18
    • 12
    • 4

    It's "not only do we ...", and then it's correct

    1 year ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/Aisha945692

    Why is the meaning not "we eat not only fish, but also meat

    1 year ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/NguyenThuQuynh

    It would make much more sense (for English users) to read this sentence as We eat neither fish nor meat. So confusing

    4 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/jb455
    jb455
    • 17
    • 12
    • 7
    • 6
    • 3
    • 2

    It's saying the opposite though: that we eat both fish and meat. "Not only but also" is a fairly common sentence structure, at least in British English.

    4 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/PaulineStinson
    PaulineStinson
    • 13
    • 13
    • 11
    • 10
    • 10
    • 2

    your sentence would be: "we eten vis noch vlees"

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/marcuslangford

    "We eten noch vis noch vlees" because Noch means both neither and nor.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/PaulineStinson
    PaulineStinson
    • 13
    • 13
    • 11
    • 10
    • 10
    • 2

    Both sentences are possible Marcus, it's not necessary to use noch twice.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/marcuslangford

    I was translating the direct statement which was "We eat neither fish nor meat" and not "We eat fish nor meat" while both are perfectly acceptable terms in both languages only mine is a direct translation.

    3 years ago

    https://www.duolingo.com/PaulineStinson
    PaulineStinson
    • 13
    • 13
    • 11
    • 10
    • 10
    • 2

    On the other hand, "vis noch vlees" is a standard expression in Dutch, and "noch vis, noch vlees" isn't.

    2 years ago
    Learn Dutch in just 5 minutes a day. For free.