Ah duolingo, teaching me important life lessons as well as a language
Nowadays a lot of us are appworms, tabletworms, mobileworms, pcworms >
I know what you are saying. But I have to admit that I find that your borrowing of that metaphor for technology only intensifies my feeling that we have actually lost something in the translation. Although bookworms aren't ever worms, bookworm does refer to insects and larvae who bore and chew through books looking for food. But computers and tablets are too sterile. It seems to highlight the fact that we are missing some depth and substance to our reading nowadays.
I'm confusing the difference between eten - to eat eten - food.
How can you tell the difference?
Context, and how it's used in a sentence. In this sentence, it wouldn't make sense for it to be a verb. I think most languages have at least a few words that can be used as a verb and a noun without any change in spelling or prounciation.
"The chain has oil" versus "Did you oil the chain?" Spanish has cocina, which means kitchen or he/she/you cook.
Cocina* not cocina.
Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. The fun gets lost in translation, though
I have just begun the Dutch course, but I am flying through the early sections because I speak both English and German. But when I got to this question my first Impulse was to translate it as Books are not to be eaten. Now I know that that is passive voice which won't be covered for quite some time, but my point is sometkmes if words have related meanings you get the gyst early on without actually getting the right translation. And as you gain more experience you don't even think about it. Just look up the English word fair. There are many, quite diverse, meanings. But when was the last time you were confused by a native speakers use of that word and choose the wrong meaning.?
"Meisjes eten fruit" Girls eat fruit "Meisjes eten het eten" The girls eat the food
From what i understand, the "het" makes it food, though i could be wrong
No Food: eten Meal: maaltijd I may have mispelled though... it's in the food lesson
Why not Boeken zijn niet eten? Or are they both technically correct, with "geen eten" being more gramatically accurate?
Ah, what a brilliant observation. Thank you. It's much like how in english you can say, "That's no moon!" (As Han Solo did about the Deathstar.) In this case "no" is working like "geen", negating a noun. But you cannot say, "That's no red!", you have to say "That's not red!", in this case not is like "niet." The only difference I'd say is that in English we can also use "not" for nouns, as long as you use an article. Aka, "That's not a moon!" is correct in English. Whereas, I assume, "Dat is niet een maan" is not correct in Dutch. Or... is it?
(Update: sudden rush of brain to the head: Perhaps "Dat is niet een maan" is correct, but it means, that is not one moon, but it might be two moons.) ??
Important life lessons with Duo.
The Dutch sentence says that books are not food, you could say that makes them not edible (which is open for debate), but to say that the Dutch sentence would be Boeken zijn niet eetbaar.
how would you remember the difference between eten(food) and eten(eat), or would you just have to have common sense, like in this sentence
English has plenty of examples of words that can be used as different parts of speech without any change in pronunciation or spelling. To paraphrase an example from my Twitter timeline: "We do not object to the object."
In this case, you'd know that eten means food(noun) because it's preceded with 'geen', which can be (partially) thought of as "not a".
Hm. I made a mistake on this one too. My understanding is that verbs ending with -en is also the infinitive form. So I translated it as: Books are not to eat! This makes good english sense to me. Would there be another way of saying that in Dutch?
I understood from the lesson notes that short vowels are to be kept short. Shouldn't it be "Boekken", then? Or does this only apply to single vowels?
It's 'boeken' becomes 'oe' doesn't have both a long and short pronunciation in Dutch. It's always a short [u].
it is hard to repeat this sentence without saying any of its "n"s, but that is the correct way I assume :|
dank je wel. it is a big relief.
but I still hear it as "Boeke zij gee neten"
Well it does make sense that you hear the n from geen as if it were before the e instead of at the end of geen. Even French, which really doesn't pronounce terminal consonants elides them onto the next word if it begins with a vowel. I don't know how much my German has helped my Dutch, but I haven't had a problem with a n's.
Could it be translated as 'their books are not food?'. I know it would not make as much sense without context but that was how I read it
A popular phrase, attributed to mothers that worry about their children that have moved out of the house is: "Jongen/meisje, je eet toch wel goed?!" (≈ Are you eating well?!). This was slightly altered in a campaign to encourage reading: "Je leest toch wel goed?!"