"Je mag niet met de auto rijden."

Translation:You may not drive.

October 2, 2014


Sorted by top post


So, is "met de auto rijden" to actually drive the car yourself or is it just to go by car, not necessarily as the driver?

August 4, 2015


I'm also wondering about this!


I have the same question. Anyone know? Native Dutch?


A passenger is just riding along / Een passagier rijdt slechts mee.


Why is it wrong "you may not drive with the car"?


It sort of makes sense, but it's not a common sentence construction in English. We'd just say "drive the car."


Or even just "drive"


As a native British English speaker I would say" drive with the car" is fine. I could imagine myself saying it.


Indeed, what is wrong?? Perhaps there are two modes of transport available, an automobile and a truck, and the speaker is saying, "Je mag niet met de auto rijden." Otherwise, why not just say, "Je mag niet rijden"?


Exactly. Wouldn't you translate "You may not drive" as "Je mag niet rijden" as you might not be driving a car, it could be a lorry or motorcycle.

I suppose there is a slight problem as "Je mag niet rijden" could translate as "You may not ride [a horse]", so using "drive" shows that we have spotted that is a car.

But I don't think it is wrong in English to put all the information about what you are driving.


I wrote "permitted" but it was not accepted. I'm a native Brit and these are synonyms, aren't they? Have reported it, but....


I agree with you. "Permitted" should be accepted.


I think there is a nuance here. Permitted is more having someone allow you to. Can can mean either ability or permission. So, I know you can drive (ability) but you can't drive my car(permission). I still haven't quite figured out how much mag (moegen) covers)


Well said - "mag" = permitted in the sense of allowed to. And that's why I reported it.


My answer for this was accepted, "You may not drive the car." But the phrase they suggested did not include the word car or auto. Why not since it's in the original?


"you can't go with the car" is incorrect? it is what I would be more likely to use in english.


That doesn't really mean the same thing. I'm a native English speaker and I would never say that. I've never heard anyone use "go with" to mean "drive".


I agree to some extent - but I'd often say "are you going by car" - which means the same thing. I guess the only difference being it applies both to the passenger as well as to the driver!


Yeah, "by car" works, but I'd never say it that way personally. It sounds kinda formal to me. I'd just say "Are you driving there?"


What is the purpose of 'met' here.

Is "Je mag niet de auto rijden" valid?


I thought "mag niet" = "must not". Why isn't that accepted?


"Mag niet" would be "may not", or "are not permitted".


"You may not drive." and "You are not allowed to drive." are two separate things. Which is the correct translation? To me, "You may not drive." should be "Je rijdt misschien met de auto.".


david_hinter, the English word "may" has different meanings:
1. may = perhaps = misschien
2. may = have permission to = can = mogen

An example of 1: "He may come, but then again he may not."
An example of 2: "You may smoke if you go outside."

The DL sentence here is about permission, not possibility.


"mogen"/"mag" is used in the sense of "Mother, may I?". Uncertainty could be expressed by "Je zou wel eens niet met de auto kunnen rijden."


Hi David - could you give me an example? I tend to use them interchangeably, and "may" is a lot shorter than "allowed to"!

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