1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Nadat wij hebben gegeten, re…

"Nadat wij hebben gegeten, rennen wij."

Translation:After we have eaten, we run.

August 29, 2014

26 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AneurinEE

What's the difference between na and nadat?

January 11, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/deguo

Can someone please answer this?

February 4, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/sowrd299

The best answer that I could find is that "na" is used with event-nouns as a preposition ("we slapen na een feesje."), while "nadat" is used with a subjunctive clause ("we slapen nadat we gaan naar een feestje.")

February 4, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AneurinEE

Thank you for this answer. Do you mean subordinate rather than subjunctive?

February 4, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/glossboss

That's right. 'Nadat', 'voordat', 'omdat', 'doordat' are all subordinating conjunctions, which introduce subordinate clauses.

April 14, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/cfreund7

Why no inverse here? Why not "Nadat hebben wij...."

August 7, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/nunes89

I have this same doubt =\

August 9, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MarqFortaleza

Just because. Really. :-) In Dutch, nadat is one of those conjunctions that doesn't require (or even allow) inversion, just like voordat, omdat, doordat, and aangezien, just to name a few.

August 9, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/jameszhou13

But when those conjunctions form the subordinate clause, then do the verbs go to the end?

October 25, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MarqFortaleza

Let's look at a sentence with a direct object as well as an indirect object:

  • We hebben een cadeau gekocht voor hem.

alternative word orders:

  • We hebben een cadeau voor hem gekocht.
  • We hebben voor hem een cadeau gekocht.

Now, if you turn it into a subordinate clause, it becomes:

  • Nadat we een cadeau voor hem hebben gekocht, gaan we eten.
  • Nadat we voor hem een cadeau hebben gekocht, gaan we eten.

Also acceptable (I think), but definitely less formal:

  • Nadat we een cadeau hebben gekocht voor hem, gaan we eten.

Incorrect:

  • Nadat we voor hem hebben gekocht een cadeau, gaan we eten.

So: yes, it's useful to remember as a rule that
if a clause begins with such subordinating conjunctions, the verbs should be at the end of the clause. :-)

October 27, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/jameszhou13

Thanks so much!

October 28, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/nunes89

Thank you very much for your answers!! :D

August 9, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MattZaghainov

Hi guys. What's wrong with "after we ate, we ran"? Thanks

August 29, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/vam1980

'...wij hebben gegeten...' is present perfect, 'after we ate' is simple past, so it's a different tense.

August 29, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MattZaghainov

sure, very stupid comment of mine, was made late in the night(

August 30, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Trixy-la-Louve

Well, I don't see a 1 to 1 correlation between the present perfect in English and the one in Dutch, but in this particular exercise, you know it translates to the English present perfect rather than simple past thanks to "rennen wij" being present tense.

Though now I am curious about how your sentence would be translated. "Nadat wij aten, renden wij". Does this work? Would "Nadat wij hebben gegeten, renden wij" also be ok, or is it too much? :)

September 23, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/kealiiballao

I'm not sure why it should be marked wrong if you say after we ate we ran. Previous questions allowed as an alternative translation with the past tense verb form instead of the perfect tense. Is there a subtle meaning here?

October 25, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/sowrd299

This is not the perfect tense. It is simply the present.

December 1, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/stationary1

To amplify Sowrd299's answer, "after we ate" is fine in its ow , but you have to say "we run" rather than "we ran", because "rennen" is present tense.

Taken together, "after we ate, we run" is not proper English, because it shifts from (simple) past to (simple) present in the middle of a sentence. When you instead say "After we have eaten, we run", you are using present perfect and simple present, which work together.

August 17, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/NBL2015

Is GEËTEN possible (instead of "gegeten") ?

November 25, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/El2theK

No, apparently it used to be that, but not anymore.

November 25, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DanyellWal1

I actually answered it: "After we've eaten, we'll run" It was marked as correct. I realize, now, that I put it in future tense. Is this still okay?

February 14, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MasonH10

Eating after running is not smart. A good path to get sick for sure.

May 9, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/yuyu2809

I thought that the stressed form ("wij" in this case) could only be used once per sentence. Am I wrong or this and exception?

September 27, 2019
Learn Dutch in just 5 minutes a day. For free.