This might be a stupid question. Is the second "we" necessary or optional? In English, we could say "we read and eat" without needing the second "we" as it is implied by the first one. I put "we read and eat" but Duolingo didn't accept it. Another question: should it have been accepted?
Hi, belgieman. A belated answer but for what it's worth, I think your translation into English should have been accepted as it seems to me to be a translation into good English and covers everything that matters. What's more, the unstressed "we" is used both times, not the emphatic "wij", so why did Duo insist the second "we" is included in translation as though it were emphasised?
About the Dutch, there's the issue of why is the subject pronoun "we" is repeated in "we lezen en we eten". I think I noticed the same thing in German sentences. Can any native speakers of Dutch or German comment? Is it just our little owl Duo giving us "odd" sentences to make us pay attention or is there some grammar rule we don't know about?
It could be 'we' or 'wij' -- 'wij' is the stressed form, and 'we' the unstressed -- unless it's a listening exercise. If it's a listening exercise, then you have to type exactly what was said.
'Je' and 'jij' are the unstressed and stressed forms of the singular 'you' (i.e. referring to one person), whereas 'jullie' is the plural 'you', referring to more than one person.
I'm still struggling to get my head around which to use when, but I think it is stressed if you are saying to someone that you do this with an implication that someone else is not doing it.
For example: 'Wij lopen', means we are walking whereas they (some other people) aren't -- i.e. we have to walk. But 'we lopen', just means that we're walking or that we're walking and not running.