1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Dutch
  4. >
  5. "Hij heeft jullie."

"Hij heeft jullie."

Translation:He has you.

November 13, 2014



I really like the fact that 'jullie' can be translated to y'all.


Well, if English had a plural version of "jullie" then that would be what "jullie" means.


English does have plural versions of "you". Perhaps not in your dialect.


Yeah, as he said y’all is the less ambiguous way (vs you) to translate jullie


What's standard English? And if such a thing exists "ya'll" is certainly not it.


I'd say "you guys" is standard English, though


Y’all is part of dialect, but it is a good translation of Dutch jullie, as it is a plural for you, whereas you itself is ambiguous whether it is plural or singular. What plurals for you are you referring to btw?


My dialect has "youse", which is used throughout Scotland, Ireland, and the North-eastern United States.


He didn't say that?

He said that English doesn't have plural forms of "you". It does.


Standard English does not, dialects do indeed. So that’s why he said y’all would be a good translation. Also note that his comment is 4 years old


"You" was the plural and "Thou" was the singular. Standard English lost the singular many years ago although the Quakers kept it. When I was a boy, it seemed that the German singular form of "You" was on the way out but modern Germans are less formal than their grandparents and often address mere acquaintances as "Tu."


Does this mean, "(He's not alone,) he has you"?


it could, or he just literally has you (hostage for example)


"He got you" should have been accepted?


Mmmmm, I'm not sure. I mean, in terms of grammar, using 'got' like that is encoding the past of 'get', which in turn would be translated as hij kreeg jullie.

Now, to mean hebben, you need to either use a form of have or have got.

In this particular case, in order to translate hij heeft jullie, you'd need to either say 'he has you', 'he has got you' or its contraction, 'he's got you'.

Of course, some speakers may use the form you proposed as synonymous with the correct sentence, but that would be considered a non-standard variation, as ungrammatical (which doesn't necessarily mean it's not used, I'm not saying that). Given the fact that this is a language course, they need to stick to grammatically correct sentences, the focus is on form.

Hope this helps.


why not je or jou here instead of jullie


Du Du hast Du hast mich!


No dude you're supposed to say 'DU' and then we continue!


He has youse ? No? If ya'll is accepted i dont see why not youse


Jar Jar Binks: Heesa has yousa


I think that more non-native speakers are familiar with the colloquial “y'all” than with the locally limited and more infrequent “youse”. As someone else wrote in this comment section, this term is used rather in Ireland, Scotland and in the North-Eastern US. And I never heard or saw someone saying or writing “youse”, let alone someone from the North-Eastern US.


In Northern Ireland, where there are influences from Scottish and from Irish, we have yiz (the unstressed form), youse and the stressed form, youenses.


What if i say "hij heeft jou"


If you were given this sentence without context then both are valid translations of the English word you, however know that you singular = jou and you plural = jullie


by the short n curlys.


so in dutch i've noticed that the j in jullie normally has a Y sound but here i'm hearing a more audible J sound, can anyone tell me if this is correct.


The Dutch j is always an English y sound, never an English j sound, unless used in certain loan words.


Isn't jullie plural? It means kinda like y'all right? Then why is the translation just "he has you" ??


Because you can be second person singular and second person plural.

[deactivated user]

    I put "He has Julie" and it was marked wrong... Wonder why.


    "Jullie" is not a name. It means "you" (in the plural form).

    [deactivated user]

      I was joking. :)


      Again with the phrases that sound like you are being kidnapped


      Yeah like Duolingo thinks we all need to be able to say these kidnapping phrases.


      This really is not an English sentence? I typed "he has yours" which in my mind is a more accurate interpretation, you can't have someone?


      Well, as I wrote in my question above, it could mean that "(He's not alone), he has you (to keep him company)." It could also mean "He has you (in his sight, on the phone, etc.)" or something like that. So there are definitely contexts in which this sentence makes sense, and it isn't as rare as some other Duolingo sentences. I'm just wondering if the Dutch sentence has the same idiomatic meanings as the English sentence.


      that'd be "hij heeft die van jullie" "He has that one of yours"


      I'd say 'he has yours' is more like hij heeft de/het jouwe. Well, maybe in Dutch your sentence works, but not in English, IMO.



      I cannot, for the love of god, differentiate "geeft' and "heeft". It sounds the same to me.

      [deactivated user]

        Same, and I couldn't find any reliable source to differentiate them. Both words sound similar on Forvo. I'd love to hear a native speaker pronouncing: "Wie geeft wat hij heeft" to know if they ultimately sound the same in context.

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