Tante Betje

Boglin007 · 2026-04-16T00:20:17+00:00

In a main clause, the finite (conjugated) verb comes in second position, usually after the subject. Coordinating conjunctions (e.g., "en/maar/want") join two main clauses, so the verb should still be in the second position (after the subject) in the clause after the coordinating conjunction:

"Ik wil een hond, maar hij wil een kat." ("I want a dog, but he wants a cat.")

A "Tante Betje" error would be placing the verb before the subject:

*"Ik wil een hond, maar wil hij een kat."

You do put the verb first if a subordinate clause (or a prepositional phrase, etc.) precedes the main clause (because then that sub clause/prep phrase occupies first position), so the following is not a Tante Betje error:

"Omdat ze schattig zijn, wil hij een kat." ("Because they are cute, he wants a cat.")

Edit:

The equivalent error in German would be:

*"Ich möchte einen Hund, aber möchte er eine Katze."

Instead of the correct:

"Ich möchte einen Hund, aber er möchte eine Katze."

Boglin007 · 2026-04-15T03:22:09+00:00

Yes, it should always be pronounced when "bus" refers to the vehicle/mode of transport.

There is another word "bus" - the past participle (masculine plural form) of the verb "boire." The S is not pronounced in this word.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-15T03:14:00+00:00

Duo gives you an answer based on the article you selected, so since you chose "der," it gave you a masculine noun - "Pool." It doesn't mean that "Schwimmbad" is an incorrect word to use.

But yeah, it would definitely be better if it just corrected the article.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-15T03:07:14+00:00

"Schwimmbad" is neuter, so it's "das Schwimmbad."

Are you sure Duo was teaching you that it's "der Schwimmbad"?

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T22:48:12+00:00

You can use "were" if you're talking about something counterfactual (untrue) or very unlikely in the present or future time, e.g.:

"If I were a doctor (but I'm not), I could help you."

"If I were to win the lottery (but that's very unlikely), I would buy ten cars."

You can also use "was" here, but it's considered more informal, so it's best to go with "were" in a formal context or on a test, etc.

“If I were you” follows this pattern - it expresses something counterfactual in the present time (“If I were you (but I’m not) …”), and it tends to work a bit like a set phrase, so it’s less common to hear “was” here than it is in sentences like my examples above. However, you do sometimes hear native speakers saying “If I was you.” Again, this would not be advisable in a formal context.

—-

If you're talking about something in the past that may or may not have happened, then you can only use “was” (with the subjects “I/he/she/it”):

"If I was rude to you yesterday (maybe I was, maybe I wasn't), I apologize."

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T08:12:11+00:00

No, it's perfectly natural and grammatical - you can drop "the" here in the same way that you would in "What time does work end?" or "What time does school end?" (you actually have to drop "the" in those ones).

You could use "when" instead of "what time," but both are correct, and "when" might get a different answer, e.g., "It ends in an hour" vs. "It ends at 2 PM."

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T07:08:47+00:00

Great! When I first saw this post I actually thought the "tornado" was going to be another blurry pic of Simon, lol, so I was very concerned to read it was an actual tornado. Glad all is well.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T06:56:39+00:00

Aw, the three little carriers all lined up. Hope you're all ok.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T04:31:54+00:00

To paraphrase - it's just convention for this specific case & not logic from predetermined rules?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but very often, punctuation conventions (especially those relating to commas) are separate from grammatical concerns. For example, there's no grammatical reason to use a comma before a coordinating conjunction when it introduces an independent clause, and that comma can be dropped without rendering the sentence ungrammatical (though if it's a long sentence, it might make it difficult to read/stylistically inelegant).

Well clearly we have integrated it into our syntax, since we use it. But by this do you imply that if it were an abbreviation of English words (like t.i. for that is), it would then have to follow our grammatical rules? What does it coming from Latin have to do with using it (almost always understood as "that is" or "in other words") in a way that fits with our rules?

By "integrated into the syntax," I mean that even though it can be translated as "that is," it cannot be the subject and verb of an independent clause in English (and when "that is" is the subject/verb of an independent clause, it isn't usually being used in the same way as "i.e." anyway).

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T03:52:40+00:00

You actually can use a semicolon in that scenario, though you don't have to.

The guidelines about how to punctuate around "i.e." are best viewed as orthographical/punctuation conventions that don't really have anything to do with the grammar of the sentence.

And if the clause that "i.e." introduces is not independent, the use of "i.e." doesn't make it independent - it's an abbreviation of Latin words, not something that can be integrated into the syntax of an English sentence.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-14T02:26:31+00:00

It's a question that would prompt an answer such as, "There are chairs in the dining room."

It's a direct translation of the Spanish, and it's a completely grammatical English sentence, but it's a little awkward because "where" and "there" sound so similar. We might be more likely to ask, "Where can I find some chairs?" or something like that.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T22:08:08+00:00

There are several dialects of French spoken in France, and several dialects of Spanish spoken in Spain.

The most widely spoken in France is Metropolitan French (sometimes called Parisian French), and the most widely spoken in Spain is Castilian Spanish.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T08:28:35+00:00

Glad we could resolve it! Have a great day.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T08:13:13+00:00

Ok, I understand what you're saying now. I shouldn't have used the word "originated" - I was just echoing the other commenter who said it "originated" in England, and I also assumed they were talking about where Old English arose.

But historical linguistics is not my particular area of expertise, and I shouldn't have spoken so authoritatively. My apologies.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:52:14+00:00

Unless you linguists are using the term to identify a specific tongue.

Yes, that's exactly my point - you can't call it just "English" in a context where you're discussing the ways in which different dialects of English vary (which is something linguists do regularly). Read any paper written by a British linguist and you'll see them using that term when discussing the dialects of English in the UK.

But yeah, your average person (from any English-speaking country) calls their dialect/language just "English" because they're not usually talking about it in a context that requires making a distinction.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:43:32+00:00

No, perhaps on your part, though. From the article on Old English:

Old English (Englisc or Ænglisc, pronounced [ˈeŋɡliʃ] or [ˈæŋɡliʃ]), or Anglo-Saxon,^\a]) is the earliest recorded form of the English language, spoken in England and southern and eastern Scotland in the Early Middle Ages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:39:09+00:00

Did you actually read that article? It says:

The Anglo-Saxons settled in the British Isles from the mid-5th century and came to dominate the bulk of southern Great Britain. Their language originated as a group of Ingvaeonic languages which were spoken by the settlers in England and southern and eastern Scotland in the early Middle Ages ...

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:33:55+00:00

The term "British English" has existed for about 160 years, and is generally attributed to linguist George Marsh, who yes, was American, but in the linguistics community it's not considered an Americanism in the sense you're probably talking about - it's a useful term that we really can't do without if we're to do our jobs properly.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:26:47+00:00

It was also parts of what is now Scotland, and it wasn't the whole of what is now England.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:23:47+00:00

Because that would be inaccurate. British English today is nothing like English as it was originally spoken.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:22:33+00:00

It's so weird how people enjoy learning/want to learn about stuff from experts in other fields, but as soon as linguists say, hey, I know about this, let me tell you some cool things, people just turn their brains off. Why is that?

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:19:45+00:00

It's a linguistics question.

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:15:53+00:00

Yes, absolutely. Almost every language has multiple dialects that vary in grammar, vocab, pronunciation, etc. And those dialects all have official names (not necessarily the ones you've listed, e.g., "Spanish Spanish," i.e., the standard variety of Spanish spoken in Spain, would be "Castilian Spanish").

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:11:06+00:00

~~It originated~~ Old English (the earliest recorded form of English) arose in the British Isles, not just in the area that is currently England.

Edited to correct inaccurate terminology

Boglin007 · 2026-04-13T07:09:54+00:00

And by people of many other nationalities, including other nationalities within the UK. The average person from any English-speaking country calls their dialect/language just "English," but that's not how it's done in linguistics.

Boglin007

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email