"Na de lunch spelen we."
Translation:After the lunch we are playing.
The verb is always the second word group in Dutch. So if another word group (like "Na de lunch") gets moved to the front for emphasis, then the verb and the subject switch places. This is called inversion. You can read more about it here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/3733010
Why is 'after lunch we will play' not accepted? It seems as though I was not sure that 'after' was not used as in the future but as in the present. Can someone please clarify this for me?
I'm coming back to this a second time.
Regarding the use of present tense:
"Daar gaan we het over hebben" is present tense, but it indicates future. I think 'gaan' operates here much the same way 'going to' does in English, meaning 'will.' "We're going to talk about that," i.e. we will talk about that momentarily.
Welke game gaan we spelen? Which game are we going to play?
The Dutch also use present tense to indicate an ongoing or habitual action, but there is normally a clear indicator of time. When talking about something happening over a period of time, present perfect progressive is used in English. For example:
Ik woon al vijf jaar in China.
I've been living in China for five years.
Ik ben nu al ruim twee jaar Zweeds aan het leren.
I've been learning Swedish for over two years now.
Although Dutch has a future tense (we zullen spelen), the Dutch often use present tense to indicate the future, much like in English. For example:
Volgende week gaat de film Han Gong-ju in première op het Internationaal Filmfestival Rotterdam.
The movie Han Gong-ju premiers next week at the Rotterdam International Film Festival. (present tense, indicating future)
"Na de lunch spelen we."
From this sentence alone, we just don't have the context to know whether it's indicating an ongoing / habitual action (We play after lunch) or the future, whether later today, tomorrow or whatever day they're talking about, which could actually be interpreted in at least three different ways (We play after lunch; We're playing after lunch; or We'll play after lunch). Without context, it could be any of these (including "after lunch we will play"). In context, everything would be clear, or another word would be added to clarify. For example:
Na de lunch spelen we soms een potje tafeltennis.
Sometimes we play a round of ping-pong after lunch. (habitual)
Na de lunch spelen de kinderen buiten of kiezen ze ervoor om binnen te lezen of knutselen.
After lunch the children play outside or they choose to read or do crafts indoors. (here they're clearly talking about a daily routine, i.e. habitual)
Komende zaterdag staat het eerste toernooi van het jaar op het programma. We beginnen om 10:00 uur. Om 12:00 zal er een heerlijke lunch klaar staan zoals we hier gewend zijn. Na de lunch spelen we de laatste wedstrijden.
This coming Saturday is the first tournament of the year. We start at 10:00 a.m. At 12:00 there will be a scrumptious lunch prepared, as we're so accustomed to here. After lunch we play the final matches. (present tense — after lunch we play — clearly indicating the future, which can also be interpreted: "after lunch we will play the final matches.")
I agree with all of that (inasmuch as it supports my contention that, in the limited context we are given, all three translations -- "we play", "we're playing", "we'll play" -- should be accepted as correct}.
On a point of grammatical terminology, though, the construction "I've been living" is an example not of the past progressive a.k.a. past continuous (that would be "I was living") but of the present perfect progressive a.k.a. present perfect continuous... :)
Ik ben het met je eens. Als je tegen een kind zegt, "Na de LUNCH spelen we" dat betekent volgens mij: Not right now, we'll play AFTER lunch. "We will play after lunch" dus. Frankly, I think it all has to do with tone and context. (But please note: I'm not native Dutch and I don't speak for Duolingo.)
Tenses don't always match up in different languages. That might be the case here. In English, we might usually say something in the future, but it would be present in another language. That's not a great clarification, but I usually make a note when I see differences.
I think it's because the future is not implied here. It can mean that either today we will play after lunch but also that normally we play after lunch (valid for the "We will play after lunch" translation. For the "We are playing after lunch" translation I'd just say that that indeed means today, but not in every language tenses are the used in the same way.).
It's not (necessarily) implied, but it's not ruled out either. That being so, "we'll play" should be accepted, alongside "we play" and "we're playing".
Nope, the sentence starts with an adverb, so there is inversion (the subject and the conjugated verb switch places). The only correct word orders here are:
- We spelen na de lunch
- Na de lunch spelen we
And if you make a question:
- Spelen we na de lunch?
See this explanation: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/3733010
the link doesnt work - does anyone have another one that explains inversion? Thanks!
Does Dutch require the definite article here? English can say "After lunch" as a general statement or "After the lunch" to mean a particular meal on a particular occasion. Would Dutch say "de lunch" in both sets of circumstances?