1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Men voorspelt onweer."

"Men voorspelt onweer."

Translation:One predicts a thunderstorm.

August 22, 2014



"One" seems like an odd pronoun to use here...I'm more accustomed to seeing it used in proverbs and gentle admonitions ("one should not scorn charity"), or suppositions ("What would you do if one were to get past your defenses"), not in basic declarative statements--I'd expect either he, she, they, or 'the meteorologist'.


I changed it to passive, to avoid the pronoun altogether: "Thunderstorms ARE predicted." This was accepted as correct, and feels much more natural to me, a native English speaker, than the mysterious "one", or having to introduce a fictitious "they", or even: "the forecasters". I don't doubt that in reality, the "one" in question must be the forecast or the forecaster. But it goes beyond translation to infer it and add it in.


I translated it the same way you did, and was pleased to see it accepted. That said, I think it's perfectly within the realms of translation to make this sort of inference - not much different from translating idioms, really. The purpose of translation is to communicate meaning, and that's what both you and I did here.:)


Is 'men' used like this usually in Dutch? For example, if I want to say "they said on the news..." is it the most natural in Dutch to use 'men'?


We mostly use 'ze' for that purpose in everyday speech. "Ze hebben onweer voorspeld." "Ze zeiden dat het warm zou worden."

If you don't want to use a pronoun, you can just as easily make it passive by saying: "Er is onweer voorspeld." We use this just as much as "Ze hebben onweer voorspeld."


Is there any specific situations where "men" is more commonly used?


Not that I can think of right now, but maybe this link might give you a little insight.



I don't get why the hint is saying thunderstorm, and when i type thunderstorm it is incorrect and they say that it should be thunderstormS Why the +s ? If thunderstorm is uncountable then it would be correct without the s as well, right?


Already answered you on this in your other post. "Onweer", in Dutch, may be uncountable, but "thunderstorm", in English, is not. It needs an article if you're going to use the singular.


one foretells weather............am i shakespeare, or what?


onweer =/= weather


Can I say "Men voorspelt een onweer"?


The hover clue says "onweer" is uncountable, so I don't think so...


What makes it uncountable?... Is it because it isn't actually "thunder...storm" but rather "onweer" -- I'm guessing that means "something weather" and since weather is uncountable that's why? Kinda like stormy weather?


You are right. On expresses something negative.

Je hebt gelijk = you are right Je hebt ongelijk = You are not right

In the word onweer on means something like bad. So it means bad weather literally, and bad weathers are not really countable.


By the way, onweer is not just bad weather. It includes thunder and lightning. When you say "het onweert" you are saying that there is thunder and lightning.


But if you can't have "a" weather, can you still have "the" weather?


Exactly like that. Onweer means bad weather. Storms, thunder, dark clouds, rain... When the prefix on- is added to a word, it makes it negative or makes it the opposite. (This doesn't mean you can add it to any word you want!) So you have 'vriendelijk' is friendly, and 'onvriendelijk' is unfriendly. Same with weather. Add on- and it's negative. Bad weather. (Also, this doesn't mean that 'weer' is only used for good weather!)


Yes, just like you can't have "a money" but can have "the money".


"one predicts a storm" wouldn't storm and thunderstorm be somewhat equal? AND I am pretty sure I've seen onweer presented differently in a different lesson? Thunderstorm was not accepted.


What was your sentence? In all the accepted translations only "thunderstorm(s)" is accepted and not storm.

Apart from that a thunderstorm like onweer has the characteristics that thunder (and lightning, is present. So a storm does not have to be a thunderstorm or onweer.


To be honest, I can't remember the exact sentence. But I remember stopping to re-read the question at the time and thought I learned it wrong in the first place. Thanks for your reply, now I know.


I have indeed come across a sentence that allowed onweer to be translated as storm, which now has been fixed.


What is a storm then if not onweer?


Storm = storm


Why is bad weather not correct? ' Onweer does not necessary means thunderstorms'


It does mean with thunder, yes. It's not just any bad weather.


Why does 'onweer' mean 'thunderstormS' , but not 'thunderstorm' here?


Both a thunderstorm and thunderstorms are accepted. Because onweer is uncountable, there's no way to tell if singular or plural is meant.


Duo does not seem to accept ...lightening storm. I thought ...onweer... was both thunderstorm as well as lightening storm. The english language hardy differentiates between the two.


If you spelt it as you have here ("lightening"), it is wrong in any case, but even with the correct spelling ("lightning"), it is strange to my ears (native UK speaker). I don't really recognize "lightning storm" - although I would know what was meant, of course. It's just that "thunderstorm" is almost always preferred. I suppose it's a little odd that we usually name it after the sound it makes, rather than how it looks, with vision being the dominant sense, for most people. But that's the way it is.


Can it not also mean inclement weather?


No - check the rest of the comments. This has already been discussed at length, and it's quite clear the answer is no.

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