Well, first of all, in English 'pants' is plural, and in Dutch it's singular. Second, you don't always translate word for word. That just doesn't work. ;)
Sometimes i miss the word 'the' out and i get 'incorrect' back! Can't win.
wow, first ducks, then birds, then elephants, then MICE ??? wow, animals are more intelligent than people in netherlands, I should like to visit that country
So, is broek more closely translated to "a pair of pants" and broeken is more like "multiple pairs of pants"?
I don't know enough american English that I would be able to tell when I should change my vocabulary. They seem accommodating to British English so far though.
Don't worry, we accept British English as well. Please report a missing translation! :)
Why "De muis draagt een broek." should be translated as "the mouse is wearing pants" and not "the mouse wears pants"? I mean, where is something that shows that it is present continuous and not present simple?
Hi Jeanne, The mouse wears pants is accepted as well. Are you should there weren't any mistakes?
Thanks for the answer) I asked, because when I wrote "the mouse wears pants, it didn't accept it and gave me the answer that "the mouse is wearing pants" would be correct. Maybe it's just a mistake in application)
I have the same situation Jeanne. I wrote 'the mouse wears pants and it's considered as wrong answer.
Well, yes, then it must have been a glitch. When such things happen, make sure you take a screenshot, upload it somewhere (like Google Drive, for instance), and then report it and explain what happened, pasting the link so the developers can see the screenshot.
For an Australian, trousers are long pants, Shorts are short pants, both are pants. Is broek long, short or both.
Generally "broek" is long, but it can be either. If you want to make the distinction in Dutch, you can use "korte broek" and "lange broek".
Well, "Draag" is when you're talking about yourself. "Draagt" is when you're talking about someone or something else in the singular. So ik draag, zij draagt (she), zij draagen (they) (plural), hij draagt, [noun] draagt, and so on and so forth. Also, the add-a-t rule works for most other verbs, such as spreek/spreekt, drink/drinkt, etc.
Because Dragen is what we call the infinitive. So for first person - ik: the general rule is to remove -en to bring it back to the 'stem' and then you add another vowel to keep the sound in the open syllable long so now it would be draag.
for second person - je, u, jij & third person - hij, zij, het: you add a 't' to the stem -> so draag + t = draagt
for plural - jullie, wij, zij, ze, we: you take it back to the infinitive -> dragen.
Therefore, if the sentence were in English "the mice are wearing pants" you would use dragen because it is plural and that goes back to the infinitive verb. "De muizen zijn dragen broeken"
If a mouse wore pants, would he wear them like this or like this? https://www.google.ca/search?q=if+a+dog+wore+pants&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjj28vDpK7RAhVo6oMKHfcoALYQsAQIGw&biw=274&bih=272
Am I the only one who would love to see that on an actual mouse? It would be so weird! (I don't count Mickey Mouse as a real mouse)
My question too. 'Pants' signifies a single item of clothing although it 'sounds like' a plural. Hence saying 'my pants is' is acceptable, while saying 'my pants are' could mean more than a single (pair of) pants. It's not simply American or English - it's almost universal and 'a pants is' should be accepted as an answer.
Pants is plural in English. “Look at all the pants that need to be folded.” In Dutch broek is singular. So “draagt een broek” is used just like, “draagt een hoet”
It appears dragen is literally translated as to carry as well. However the app has only taught dragen to mean to wear so it will probably count it as incorrect
The Dutch "broek" is much like the French "pantalon", which is also a singular noun referring to a pair of pants. So Dutch is not unique in using a singular noun in this instance. And it's not so illogical, because pants are actually a single garment. We just refer to them in the plural in English because of the two legs I guess (although we don't follow the same logic with shirts or jerseys or things that have two arms - go figure).
The pants in question must be pretty small for a mouse to be wearing them. But maybe they help make it less tasty for cats ...
"De muis draagt een* broek" it's singular and not plural! -.- So that's: "The mouse wears a pant" and not "pants"!!! -.-'
Oooh, it's equal shoes then...'' I couldn't know that xD Thanks, now I know it.
From what I have learned so far, I would say it is not similar to shoes. "Shoen" refers to one shoe, singular. "Shoenen" is either a pair of shoes or many shoes.
So I am - bedankt!
Aaaand I am unable to edit the comment. Hopefully the mistake will help others in the future, then. :)
The answer seems not correct. Why een broek is translated as pants?? The correct translation should be a pant right?
There is no such noun in English as "pant". We either say "pants" or "a pair of pants". So the Dutch "broek" can be translated as just "pants" (or "trousers") or "a pair of pants/trousers". Other languages like French and German also use a singular noun (pantalon and Hose respectively) to mean one pair of pants. The plural forms of these nouns (broeken/pantalons/Hosen) refer to multiple pairs of pants, but confusingly can also be translated as just "pants".
A similar thing happens with glasses (as in spectacles, not the drinking vessels!). French and German (and I think Dutch) use a singular noun to mean one pair of glasses, and the plural noun to mean more than one pair.
Every language has different rules and their own peculiar quirks. This is one of the interesting ways that Dutch differs from English, even though it is one of our language's nearest relatives.