'Ik hoop dat ik je weer zie.' > I hope that I see you again. This sentence, containing a subordinate clause, is analysed as follows:
The word order of the whole sentence is quite straight forward: 1. subject = ik 2. verb = hoop 3. object = dat ik je weer zie
Let's analyse position 3. 3. = a subordinate clause, and consequently the word order within it is different:
- relative pronoun = dat
- subject = ik
- object = je
- adverb = weer
- verb = zie
In a subordinate clause the tensed verb is in the last position. So, the adverb moderating it proceeds this verb. Obviously, the conjunction comes first in the subordinate clause. Then the subject followed by the object.
I hope this makes sense!
For the pedants out there, the "dat" in the sentence above is a conjunction, not a relative pronoun. Otherwise, all good.
While I agree with you regarding the fact that dat in this context is a subordinating conjunction, I just wanted to ask you... Don't you think that your tone and choice of words was a tiny bit... harsh?
No offence, though. :)
I don't think so, it sounds strange to my ears.
"Opnieuw" is typically only used with dynamic actions. It implies starting over again, repeating something. For example, you could say:
- Ik bekijk je opnieuw. - I look at you again. (dynamic action)
- Ik zie je weer/nogmaals. - I see you again. (passive observation)
The form 'zien' is the infinitive. Since 'ik' is the subject in the 'dat'-clause, the verb has to be in the 'ik'-form.
''Zien'' requires a direct object (je), why isn't this pronoun inflected? Shouldn't it be ''jou''?
How i will going to say: "I hope that he pass the exam. " in Dutch? Ik hoop dat hij het examen slaagt. Is this correct?