"Zij luistert naar deze omroep."
Translation:She listens to this broadcaster.
Nope, omroep = broadcaster (e.g. BBC, VARA, NCRV, ABC), uitzending = broadcast, omroeper is a person that announces upcoming shows, on Dutch TV there haven't been omroepers anymore for the past 15-20 years I think, you can still see them occasionally on Belgian television.
Ok, thank you. It differs from Afrikaans again. We also have omtoep, omroeper, and uitsending, but the meanings are subtly different. There are many, many skunk words (false friends) between Afrikaans and Dutch.
Ah, so in the United States, we would say "station," "network," or "channel."
In Dutch we also use zender or kanaal (channel in English) which isn't synonymous to omroep because we have over 20 publieke omroepen which all broadcast on the 3 public tv and 6 public radio channels. Next to that there are 2 major commercial broadcasters that have 4 tv channels each and a bunch of smaller commercial broadcasters.
What a fascinating system. We have similar things (larger, of course, if one takes the whole country into account), but considering the words we use, we may conceive of them differently. They also are different in each locality, with sometimes quite marked regional flavor. So, as a viewer, I most often refer to "channels," but really that refers to the number on the television or radio. The station is a local corporate entity. It may be a purely local, small-time outfit, but it may also receive its transmissions from a "network," whether public or commercial. I think that "network" probably then comes closest to "omroep," although what you are talking about might be what we call a "production company," which produces shows that it sells to a network. A number of the networks are also corporately owned by a larger company, which sometimes owns completely unrelated companies as well (General Electric comes to mind as one such corporate owner of a family of networks). The networks within that corporate family are often specialized (news, sports, educational, etc.). I think, because of the local differences, we usually speak in terms of the local station or channel, where you would refer to the omroep or, in English, network. Now you have me wanting to watch some Nederlandstalige TV.
Well Dutch broadcasters/omroepen are remnants from pillarisation that existed in the 20th century, basically the protestant, catholic, socialistic and liberal pillars all had their own political parties, newspapers, trade unions, sports clubs, schools and broadcasters (although liberals were against the pillarisation). There wasn't much interaction between members from the different pillars.
De-pillarisation started in the second half of the 1960's, driven by increasing wealth, a young generation that had different views and secularisation, which meant that boundaries between the different pillars slowly evaporated (for the most part it had disappeared by the 80's and 90's). But there still are Dutch broadcasters, political parties and schools linked to religions.
If I'm not mistaken broadcasters often have their own production companies. But there also are production companies that are not linked to broadcasters, so again, they are not the same thing. :)
I was familiar with the concept of pillarisation from Ian Buruma's Murder in Amsterdam, but I never remember how universal it once was.
Sorry Duo, the person who presents the news is ...the broadcaster...the organization that delivers the news ( CNN, CNBC etc) is the broadcast organization, not the broadcaster. Given my advanced age, I cannot recall these organizations ever having been called the.....broadcaster. Are they broadcasters...of course...they just are not called that in daily parlance.
My age may be more or less than yours and I may very well come from a different region of the English-speaking world than you, but I have usually heard the term "broadcaster" used of the company or network. NBC, for instance is a major broadcaster (or at least used to be). We would call the person who read the news the presenter or the newscaster or, if he was the central voice of the newscast, the anchorman. Indeed, there was a recent comedy movie simply called "Anchorman" that satirized the personalities of such newscasters. A man like Walter Cronkite or Dan Rather may be a newsman, but where I come from, he is not a broadcaster.