Translation:She does not dare to go home alone at night.
"Te gaan" will always go to the end of the sentence. The earlier part is all arranged in the order of "Time, Manner, Place".
I'm unfamiliar with this more complicated setup as well. I thought it meant she "dares to not go home alone" instead of "not daring to go home alone". The prior sounds like she is daring to take someone risky home. For me it's a question of knowing when to position the "niet" so that it means the right thing.
With niet positioned before alleen, this conveys that she might indeed go home at night, but not alone.
How do you know what the "niet" is negating?
I thought it meant "niet alleen" so "not alone." But how do you know that it is "niet durft" and not "niet gaan?"
It should be an acceptable answer although it's more common to place "alone" after "home".
This is a long time back, but just in case. The 's doesn't apply to the verb, it applies to the time after it: 's nachts. While (des) was used for the genitive case, now it's used before a unit of time to signify repetition. " 's nachts" being "in the night times" just like how 's ochtends means "in the mornings"
Does this 's have anything to do with names of cities like 's-Gravenhage (The Hague) or 's-Hertogenbosch ?
Heer des huizes is indeed a fixed expression that is still used. However all the Couperus references are old fashioned (which makes sense as he lived in the late 19th and early 20th century). Also the Geert Mak reference is not really everyday language, he probably had artistic reasons to use this form. You can compare commissaris van de koning (governor) which don't use the case system anymore, so no more: des konings/der koningin.
A few examples of fixed expressions which use cases, that are still used commonly:
- op den duur = in the long run
- te allen tijde = at all times
- in groten getale = in big numbers (usually refers to many people showing up)
It sometimes occurs in short descriptions and (I think) in fixed collocations. I've seen it before in a newspaper and in a book. But it's not common in speech, I think. (I'm neither native nor fluent, but I read a few books in Dutch)
I want to say no, but I'm not fluent so I wouldn't have the authorisation. Then again, place names are with 's ('s Gravenbrakel in flanders for example) so it's obviously not a recent thing, and also 's is the standard. Then again people still use "thou" sometimes in English so I'm not sure really.
There are examples when it certainly has appeared in the last 125 years, especially in a religious context, for instance de heer des huizes, de handlanger des Heeren, het wezen des Woords, de vervloekingen des hemels, het graf des Profeten (all taken from Louis Couperus), or, if you want something more recent (albeit a quotation), spion des konings (Geert Mak, 2000).
She dares not...
should be perfectly ok right? I'm reporting it cause I'm pretty sure it's fine, but I want to make sure here.
It's fine as long as you also get rid of the "to". ie. "She dares not go..." and "She doesn't dare to go..." are both correct, but "Shes dares not to go..." is not.
Is it acceptable in english to use 'at nights'? The plural was rejected.
Why is "she dares not go to her house alone at night" not accepted? It's good English.
I wonder if it's because in Dutch "naar huis gaan" means to " "go home", whereas the English "to her house" could mean both her own house or someone else's house. Did you report your answer as an alternative?
Yes i think "naar huis" = "nach haus" ger. means to go home no matter if it is an actual house or who owns the house, just whatever is considered the "home".
How about "she dares not to go alone to her house at night"? Might be a bit flowery, but could it be a good translation?
I thought "huis" was "house" and "thuis" was "home". Can somebody explain this please?