"De patiënt heeft kort haar."
Translation:The patient has short hair.
It means it is not a "ie" sound (which sounds more like "ii"), but actually a "i+e" sound. For example, in "fiets" you pronounce it "fiits", while in "België" you pronounce it "Belgie".
Why was it "haren" when we were talking about long hair, but "haar" now it's short? I thought the normal form was singular, as in this example (and as in English).
If it were long, I would use 'haar' as well. So you are right about the singular form being the 'normal' one. Sometimes, the plural is used (preferably), but I cannot explain when (because when that happens, hte singular is also acceptable). In this sentence, you can switch to 'korte haren', it is not wrong. ;)
Thank you. I guess it's just one of those peculiarities I'll have to live with. ;) I did understand it either way, but despite the length of time I've been regilding my tree, I don't think I'd ever come across the plural version before. It's handy to know it can sometimes be that way, even if I wouldn't use it myself.
In English, when I started going grey, I suppose you could say I had "some grey hairs" (if it's still distinct individual ones, we'd use the plural). I think now it's more than a few, we'd just say I have "some grey hair" (not "hairs")
This seems to be the case
"You say "het haar" when talking about hair in general (such as body hair) or your haircut/style/do."
"You say "de haar" when talking about a single hair, or "de haren" in case you mean a collection of single hairs as opposed to a hairdo."