In this case it means that there have to be fruit trees, Het veld ligt vol met fruit is correct too, but that would mean the fruit is lying on the ground or in piles.
Indeed, so it is an odd sentence (vertical displays with fruit is a bit farfetched if you ask me). However, you can change it to a perfectly normal and correct sentence like: "Het veld staat vol met gras" (The field is full of grass) or "Het veld staat vol met tarwe" (The field is full of wheat), the staan or liggen in those sentences depend on the thing in the field, unlike e.g. Het veld ligt ten zuiden van het dorp (The field is south of the village) where the staan/liggen is determined by the field itself.
So if it is raspberries, use staan, if strawberries use liggen. That does sound farfetched. It might be safer to stick with zijn, since there is no context here to help.
Actually staan would be used when talking about strawberry plants and the strawberries attached as well, e.g. you say ik heb aardbeien in de tuin staan, if you say ik heb aardbeien in de tuin liggen then people will think you removed them from the plant and they are lying in the garden somewhere. But if you talk about the exact position of strawberries (not the plant), then they can e.g. liggen op de grond and you don't know whether they are still attached to the plant or not. Don't ask me why, I agree all this doesn't seem make a lot of sense for plants like strawberries that don't grow upwards. :) I guess all alive plants use staan, once they are dead or talking about the fruits when removed, it's the position that determines the verb.
This must all be awkward when learning the language, however it sounds unnatural to use zijn for positional to be. So you have 3 options (with all of these you will almost always be understood):
- you just give it a go and have a 50-70% (?) chance of getting it right with staan/liggen using this rule of thumb: "if the exact position is important (humans, animals, dolls, robots, etc) use the appropriate one, for all the rest: if it can (theoretically) fall over, use staan, if it is inside something else, use zitten otherwise use liggen" and over time you learn and improve
- you use zijn and you sound unnatural and like a foreigner every time you use this
- you use zich bevinden and you sound formal to very formal (depending on the sentence), but you'll be correct in the vast majority of situations (the feeling is roughly similar to English sentences like Kate finds herself in main street)
If you ask me, the first option is the best, unless you are an advanced learner without an accent, people will know you are not a native speaker anyway so they will accept that you make mistakes (you might be corrected though…). When you use option 2 and 3, I think it will take you longer to learn to apply it correctly for the common situations.
There is no such a word 'tree' in the sentence. And berries are also fruit
What about "The field is filled with fruit"? Isn't that an appropriate translation? Thanks in advance :)
I'm not a native English speaker, but to me that sounds like the field is a gigantic fruit bowl.
"Met" seems weird here to translate to "of"... Why is "op" or "van" not uses instead?
Dutch pre/postpositional affixes can be unpredictable sometimes.
Some are part of a (phrasal) verb (e.g. houden van - to love):
- "Ik hou van hem." I love him.
Others may be part of a separable verb (e.g. opstaan - to stand/get up):
- "Hij staat altijd vroeg op." He always gets up/wakes up early.
And in the midst of this, word order and other aspects may further create challenges when constructing (or deconstructing) sentences.
You simply just need to read a lot of Dutch. News sources, blogs, etc. -- essentially anything that is dynamic/changes content regularly -- thus to provide consistently 'new' content. Then you can see when certain sentence components are used, and also under which contexts.
Best wishes ^.^