Is there any chance that there will be a Dutch (Belgium) course in the future?
I realize that it is very similar, but that just means it won't be too much work to change the things that are in fact different.
Does hardlopen refer to sprinting alone, or all running, including long distance running?
Hardlopen is all running as a sport or recreational, anything faster than walking qualifies, e.g. Ik loop ieder weekend een uur hard (I run for an hour every weekend). The verb joggen (loanword from English) is also used for recreational running (not for the sport or serious training for the sport).
Rennen is basically running in all other circumstances, e.g. Ik moet altijd rennen om de trein te halen (I always have to run to catch the train).
Usually when I cross another group of runners they call me 'loper'. Is it a contraction of hardloper?
You can think of it that way, but it's also used in general for participants in any kind of running competition (including sprints), not just when there is need for a short term (like your example of warning your group of runners for another runner). Also it's normal to say things like ik loop de 400 meter, this clearly involves running and not walking.
I saw "ik ben gelopen" in another sentence, and here it is "jij hebt helopen". Which is the correct auxiliary verb to be used with "lopen" - "zijn" or "hebben"?
See the bottom of this thread https://www.duolingo.com/comment/3859133
As it said, verbs of motion can use either hebben or zijn depending on the sentence context. If emphasis is on the action (such as this sentence), then hebben would be used. If emphasis is on where the action is going (for instance, if the sentence was "You walked to the station"), then zijn would be used (Jij bent naar het station gelopen).
Personally I think it would suit English grammar better to translate this sentence as I have been walking for a long time. Is there any way Dutch would translate this differently?
You have been walking for a long time would be "jij was een lange tijd aan het lopen". Also see the comments about zijn and hebben above.
What I mean is: after walking for several hours (but before stopping) you might be told by your fellow hiker you've been walking for a long time! which is different from you were walking for a long time (that day in the past). You have walked for a long time could be what they tell you after finishing the hike. So my question is: given that jij was een lange tijd aan het lopen sounds to me more like you were walking for a long time than anything else to me, does the English nuance of perfect continuous really not correspond to (at least one of the) meaning(s) of jij hebt (een) lange tijd gelopen?
Could this sentence be interpreted as "You have walked (as an activity) for a long time" (e.g. you've walked every day for 10 years)?
Hallo! Ik heb wat hulp nodig :)
I thought that words whose 'stems' end in: p, t, k, s, f, ch ...
... would have a "past participle" using this combination: ge + stem + t
hopen - hoop - gehoopt koken - kook - gekookt missen - mis - gemist
Why is this not the case with 'loop'?