1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Heb je in het zwembad gezwom…

"Heb je in het zwembad gezwommen?"

Translation:Have you swum in the swimming pool?

September 25, 2014



Swim, Swam, have Swum.


Representing Scotland - swam not swum. That is not a word in these parts.


And I grew up saying "brung". At some point, you learn proper grammar.


I used "swam". After the initial outrage that duolingo was questioning my native tong I can see from this discussion it was a genuine error! It's interesting that by learning other languages, I'm learning more about my native language too:)


Also from california, also use have swam


sing, sang, sung......swim, swam, swum......drink, drank, drunk..........I'm from California, too. It's just a common mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.


Interesting.... We English learners are always aware of "swum", 'cause we always get a list of irregular verbs that we learn by heart with a lot of suffering.


Interesting discussion. Have swam is definitely non-standard, as is have drank, they grate on my ears whenever I hear them - but strangely enough, have swum and have drunk sound weird also, even though those are the forms I automatically go to. I suspect these two verbs (and maybe sing? will have changed their past particples within say, fifty or 100 years.


Probably, according to an article I once read, it theorized that the least used words are the most likely to change. But I also don't agree with it because one of the words mentioned seems pretty common to me.


Maybe not - this sort of pattern still seems to be productive in some varieties of English. In England, and maybe elsewhere, 'sneaked' is being replaced by the seemingly irregular 'snuck' that I heard growing up and had presumed was standard because it 'seemed right.' We might be stuck with vowel shifts for a long time yet.


I've also heard 'snuck up on someone'! Ok, I'm not crazy then, I have definitely heard it. It may not be standard, but it's there...


Duolingo once again teaching me how to speak my native language.


i have really never heard of "swum" and im in college :o


I think many people have never heard it and just say "have swam", since that would make the most sense if it was regular. But it still seems like "swum" would have popped up in a literary context at some point :)


if it had been a regular verb, you would have just added -d/-ed to the base form. But it's not, so, swim, swam, swum.


Turns out 'swimmed' isn't a real word... :/


To be honest, in my area of the US, we always use the verb "to go" when we talk about swimming. This sentence sounds grammatically correct, but ridiculous and overly proper, as we'd say, "Have you ever gone swimming in the swimming pool?" As long as we're talking about dialects!


What about "I swam 20 laps" or "I swam across the lake" or "we swam across the river"? I know what you mean about "to go swimming" but I'm not sure you've considered all the contexts.


Have never heard have swam until this thread... they swim, they swam, they have swum


English usage is swimming baths and Scottish swimming pond. Please allow these.


So why here "Ben jij in het zwembad gezwommen" is wrong but two sentences earlier "Ik ben naar Frankrijk gezwommen" was the correct answer?


I am a dutch native speaker. It is: ergens IN gezwommen hebben. SO ik heb in de zee gezwonnen. AND ik BEN NAAR iets gezwommen. SO apparently it is not only the verb ZWEMMEN that is responsible for the HEBBEN or ZIJN choice but it is the combination: ZWEMMEN IN = HEBBEN and ZWEMMEN NAAR is ZIJN. trying another verb: FIETSEN. Ik HEB IN de tuin GEFIETST. EN ik BEN NAAR huis GEFIETST. The same with Lopen.


When you talk about travelling to (naar) somewhere you use the auxiliary zijn as you would if you had used gegaan (Ik ben naar Scheveningen gefietst). When you talk about the activity on its own you use the auxiliary hebben (Ik heb vandaag veel gefietst).


Swimming is a continuous action. It's possible to say 'have been swimming' as well.


"He swam the fifty meters in fifteen seconds." From someone who spent many years on the swim team ;-}


That's the simple past. This exercise is about past perfect. Two different tenses.


This exercise is about the PRESENT perfect. The PAST perfect is "had swum". But yes, the past participle is "swum" in any case.


the faster male voice seems to say je while the slower version says je


It really sounds like "jij" instead of "je" in this one


Possibly a better translation would be, "Have you been swimming in the swimming pool." Yes, it's not in past tense like the Dutch sentence, but "swum" is considered awkward, at least in the vernacular, that most people would instinctively avoid it.


You can't change tense and mood that much just to make the sentence sound ôl on your vernacular. Have swam grates on my ears. Have swum is correct. See the conjugation below.


Swum - really? I don't think so.

Related Discussions

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