Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

[voorzetsels]
Do we buy our train tickets 'in' or 'op' the station? Do we ask 'voor' or 'om' informatie?
Post Reply
k.tihanyi
Lid
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:57 pm
Country of residence: Italy
Mother tongue: Hungarian
Second language: Italian
Third language: English
Fourth language: German
Gender: Female

Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

Post by k.tihanyi » Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:21 am

I'm reading in several cases the expression: "teruggaan tot in de tijd". E.g.:

...teruggaan tot in de tijd van Noach...

Why not:

...teruggaan tot de tijd van Noach...

,so that without "in"? Or should it mean, that one does not return just to the beginning of this time, but enters in a whole period?

Is there any rule for this type of "accumulation" of prepositions?

Thanks a lot...

ngonyama
Superlid
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:15 am
Country of residence: United States
Mother tongue: Dutch (Netherlands)
Second language: English
Third language: German
Fourth language: French
Fifth, sixth, seventh, ..., languages: Russisch, Xhosa

Re: Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

Post by ngonyama » Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:20 am

k.tihanyi wrote:I'm reading in several cases the expression: "teruggaan tot in de tijd". E.g.:

...teruggaan tot in de tijd van Noach...

Why not:

...teruggaan tot de tijd van Noach...

,so that without "in"? Or should it mean, that one does not return just to the beginning of this time, but enters in a whole period?

Is there any rule for this type of "accumulation" of prepositions?

Thanks a lot...

Hmmm, yeah, :o , eh... We do say such things don't we.... #-o I suppose the "in" is trying put the listener right inside that period.

E.g. there is a difference between:
Het water liep tot de kamer
Het water liep tot in de kamer.

In the latter case you got wet sitting in the room, in the first that is less clear. If the water came right up to the room but not inside we'd say:
Het water liep tot aan de kamer.

Tot indicates a point up to which happens. Whether that point is inside the room or at its door is then made more precise with the second preposition.

I do admit that it is the first time I ever worried about that... Perhaps it is a simple case of elision:

Het water liep tot (een punt) in de kamer
Het water liep tot (een punt rakende) aan de kamer
Teruggaan tot (een tijdstip) in de tijd van Noach.
Dit is bedoeld voor (gebruik) in de huiskamer en niet voor (gebruik) in de tuin.

The preposition "tot" usually implies a point in space or time, so that can be presumed understood, just like bedoeld voor implies a use of something in most cases.

k.tihanyi
Lid
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:57 pm
Country of residence: Italy
Mother tongue: Hungarian
Second language: Italian
Third language: English
Fourth language: German
Gender: Female

Re: Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

Post by k.tihanyi » Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:21 pm

Thanks a lot.
So you could also say?:
„Het water liep tot aan de kamer.”
Heeeelp!! This is really very difficult for me. I have just often difficulties to understand if a certain preposition is a part of a separable verb actuallay separated of a preposition.
Sincerelly basing on the logics and possibilities (no prepositions at all but suffixes sticked to the word, so one word one suffix) of my Hungarian language I would say:
Het water loopt in de kamer binnen.
And in this case the verb is „binnenlopen” and ”in” is the single preposition of place of the „kamer”. „tot” seems me superfluous, because it is evident that the water had to reach the room to be able to enter in. If I would like to accentuate that the water arrived even up to the room, I would say:
Het water loopt zelfs tot de kamer.
And in this case very probably that there will be water also inside, because it is very difficult that the water is waiting at the door, but in this contest this is not important.
With your logics could we say also,
„The water loopt tot in door de slaapkamer.”
just for saying that the water is already reaching the next kamer of the hous too? Surely one would express this concept in a different way. Or?
In case of „teruggan”, I would say:
„Ik ga in de tijd tot Noach terug.”
or
„Ik ga tot de tijd van Noach terug.”
The second is which perhaps accentuates more that I enter also in the time period, but if this important or not should come out anyway from the contest.
The „bedoel voor in” seems also for me an elision, and so it is more clear for me. The „in” is the single preposition of place of the „kamer”/”tuin”, so there is no more prepositions accumulated together.

ngonyama
Superlid
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:15 am
Country of residence: United States
Mother tongue: Dutch (Netherlands)
Second language: English
Third language: German
Fourth language: French
Fifth, sixth, seventh, ..., languages: Russisch, Xhosa

Re: Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

Post by ngonyama » Tue Mar 31, 2015 4:11 am

k.tihanyi wrote:Thanks a lot.
So you could also say?:
„Het water liep tot aan de kamer.”
Heeeelp!! This is really very difficult for me. I have just often difficulties to understand if a certain preposition is a part of a separable verb actuallay separated of a preposition.
Sincerelly basing on the logics and possibilities (no prepositions at all but suffixes sticked to the word, so one word one suffix) of my Hungarian language I would say:
Het water loopt in de kamer binnen.

We would say: het water loopt de kamer binnen

And in this case the verb is „binnenlopen” and ”in” is the single preposition of place of the „kamer”. „tot” seems me superfluous, because it is evident that the water had to reach the room to be able to enter in. If I would like to accentuate that the water arrived even up to the room, I would say:
Het water loopt zelfs tot de kamer.
And in this case very probably that there will be water also inside, because it is very difficult that the water is waiting at the door, but in this contest this is not important.

No! It is important because this is NOT what the word "tot" means. It indicates a point where something else begins, say the room.
With your logics could we say also,
„The water loopt tot in door de slaapkamer.”

???? Since when is there such a thing as "logic" in language?? Language is associative, not logical. It associates concepts to certain sounds or their written representations. In Hungarian you says harom for 3. How illogical of you!

As such your sentence sentence is not acceptable Dutch, but you can say: Het water loopt tot in de kamer door. This is usually analyzed as coming from the separable verb doorlopen, but do keep in mind that "door" is a prepositional adverb and Dutch makes a lot of use of such adverbs, sometimes assoicated with verbs -as here- sometimes with pronominal abverbs like erdoor, ergens door, hierdoor etc.


just for saying that the water is already reaching the next kamer of the hous too? Surely one would express this concept in a different way. Or?

Yes, you would say: het water loopt door het hele huis heen.

In case of „teruggan”, I would say:
„Ik ga in de tijd tot Noach terug.”

You can say that: it means I take a time machine -real or imaginary- and stop at the day that Noah was buried.
or
„Ik ga tot de tijd van Noach terug.”
same meaning: If Noach lived from 8000BC till 7900BC you go back to 7900BC, not before.

The second is which perhaps accentuates more that I enter also in the time period, but if this important or not should come out anyway from the contest.
Neither enter that time period, because that is NOT what the preposition tot implies. E.g if I say de gehele getallen van 10 tot 16, I mean the numbers 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15. If I want to include 16 I say: de gehele getallen tot en met 16

The „bedoel voor in” seems also for me an elision, and so it is more clear for me. The „in” is the single preposition of place of the „kamer”/”tuin”, so there is no more prepositions accumulated together.

k.tihanyi
Lid
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:57 pm
Country of residence: Italy
Mother tongue: Hungarian
Second language: Italian
Third language: English
Fourth language: German
Gender: Female

Re: Why and when "teruggaan tot in de tijd"?

Post by k.tihanyi » Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:56 am

Thanks a lot again,

It is even worse: 3 in Hungarian, instead of harom, is három.

I agree with you, the logic is perhaps not the correct terminology. I meant in general the (structural, grammatical, word usage, phrasing etc) differences in expressing the same concept in different languages, beyond of course the fact, that who is barking is a "kutya", "hond", "dog" or "cane".

If I understood well, there is no explicit grammatical rule for such type of multiple preposition usage. One should arrive to the level of feeling which is correct in dutch. Thank you very much for your corrections, examples and explanations, they surely help me (I hope) to make a small step ahead in this direction.

Post Reply