Another form of you?

[voornaamwoorden]
A pronoun replaces a noun or another pronoun. E.g. 'he', 'which', or 'her'. There are different types of pronouns: personal, possessive, indefinite, relative... You can post your questions about Dutch pronouns here.
User avatar
Quetzal
Retired moderator
Posts: 2173
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:51 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Dutch (Flanders)
Location: Belgium

Post by Quetzal » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:02 pm

Bieneke wrote:Thanks, Dirk, for your explanation.

I think you (Dirk and Quetzal) are talking about two different things: How it should be and how it is used. In the e-ANS, I have not found anything about the past tense forms connected with 'ge' or 'gij' but I did find some confirmation of what Dirk wrote on website of the Taalunie (official Language Union):

Verleden tijd onregelmatige werkwoorden: http://woordenlijst.org/leidraad/11/5/
Gij kwam/gij kwaamt: http://taaladvies.net/taal/advies/vraag/344
Gij had/gij hadt http://taaladvies.net/taal/advies/vraag/343

There really are official rules for conjugating verbs after 'ge' or 'gij' .

I think that the fact that people often violate these rules does not immediately disqualify them as 'regional'. I thought it was quite a funny remark as the very use of 'ge' and 'gij' is already considered regional. ;-) Below, I copied a paragprah from http://taaladvies.net/taal/advies/vraag/344:
De Taalunie wrote:Het gebruik van ge/gij behoort tot de verheven stijl of is regionaal bepaald (het wordt in grote delen van België en in het zuiden van Nederland, vooral in Noord-Brabant gebruikt). De daarbij horende verledentijdsvormen van het werkwoord gelden als archaïsch. In enkele gevallen kan bovendien verwarring optreden met de vorm van de tegenwoordige tijd van een ander werkwoord: ge braakt (van braken), ge zaagt (van zagen), ge staakt (van staken). Om deze redenen worden de bedoelde combinaties vaak vermeden of worden de werkwoordsvormen ten onrechte vervangen door die welke bij u horen (ge kwam, ge zag enz.).

I have no opinion about whether it is useful to learn these rules. I suppose you can perfectly do without this knowledge but as an enquiring Dutch learner living in Flanders, you may wonder if there are any rules or guidelines for using 'ge' and 'gij'. After all, you hear it every day but there is no mention of it in your grammar books and your NT2 teacher tells you it is not an important thing to learn. If I were that student, Just being told there are no rules (because they are archaic or outdated), would not really satisfy me.
If I were an enquiring Dutch learner living in Flanders, I think I would like to know the forms as they are used rather than the theoretical ones... considering that it's strictly a spoken thing (okay, well, and now online...) to begin with, one wonders what the point of knowing the official rules is.

Especially when, in the one text where it IS considered acceptable to use them in writing, i.e. the Bible, these official rules are entirely ignored: apart from the few exceptions among which "Gij waart", the Bible simply uses the normal past tenses.

User avatar
Bieneke
Site Administrator
Posts: 1965
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:18 pm
Country of residence: Netherlands
Mother tongue: Dutch (Netherlands)
Second language: English
Gender: Female
Location: Maastricht

Post by Bieneke » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:28 pm

Bedankt voor de link, Dirk. Ik heb me een ongeluk gezocht naar die pagina.

Quetzal, the very fact that between us, we are interested in both theory and application, already proves the use of this whole thread. Your information about the application of the theory will make some decide to completely ignore this topic while others will still insist on learning it all. Without Dirk's contribution, Dutch learners would not even know there is a choice.

I suggest we just let Dutch learners be the judge of what is useful and what is not. Personally, I would not find the simple labels 'useful' or 'not useful' sufficient to decide what is useful to me but the theoretical and practical background information you and Dirk provided would give me some idea why the information would (not) be useful (to me).
Bieneke

nyong
Lid
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:13 am
Country of residence: Germany
Second language: German

gij, ge waart

Post by nyong » Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:45 am

dirkmath wrote:Irregular verb:
jij was - gij waart
It's not irregular in the sense that it follows the general rule of gij-conjugation.
Grytolle wrote: Gij-forms generally uses a plural stem, which is completely logical, since gij used to be a plural:
kunnen => kun-nen -> kunt
evilbu wrote: "je was"-->"ge waart"
"je zou"-->"ge zoudt"
"je werd"-->"ge werdt"
"je had"--->"ge hadt"
The obvious conclusion, the forms (almost) always end in -t. Also note that they are all made out of plural stems: (zouden, waren, werden, hadden + t)

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: gij, ge waart

Post by Grytolle » Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:19 pm

nyong wrote:
dirkmath wrote:Irregular verb:
jij was - gij waart
It's not irregular in the sense that it follows the general rule of gij-conjugation.
True. But it's irregular from a purely synchronic perspective: normal tussentaal (Brabantic and standard language influence) has lost the -d/-t except in "gij waard" and by inversion with the pronoun -e:
waarde gij
liepte gij
zatte gij
kwamde/kwaamde gij etc

On the other hand, East-Flemish (and therefore also lots of their non-dialect speech) keeps the -d/-t before vowels and pausa, but instead adds it to the third person "hij liept altijd weg". All in all, I'm pretty sure there is almost never any difference made in the past tense between hij and gij, except for "gij waard" vs "hij was". Seeing as the Brabantic (the most influential dialect group) system has more resemblance to standard Dutch, it's probable that the d/t will disappear completely in the past tense, except for "gij waard"

evilbu wrote: "je was"-->"ge waart"
"je zou"-->"ge zoudt"
"je werd"-->"ge werdt"
"je had"--->"ge hadt"
The obvious conclusion, the forms (almost) always end in -t. Also note that they are all made out of plural stems: (zouden, waren, werden, hadden + t)
[/quote]
ge waard, ge zou(d), ge werd, g(e h)ad

the d in zoud, I've heard a few times, especially before a vowel
:-)

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: Another form of you?

Post by Grytolle » Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:23 pm

In more dialectal speech you can sometimes find traces of the difference though...

kwomde gij, logde gij et c (aa > o) as opposed to "hij kwam/lag"

still that doesn't change that the rules for the archaic "gij" don't apply to normal flemish, just like Quetzal argues :)

Conspiracy theory: The language regulators try to make "jij" more attractive by making "gij" less familiar to its speakers :mrgreen:
:-)

nyong
Lid
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:13 am
Country of residence: Germany
Second language: German

Re: gij, ge waart

Post by nyong » Sat Jan 09, 2010 4:34 am

Dank u!
Grytolle wrote:normal tussentaal (Brabantic and standard language influence) has lost the -d/-t except in "gij waard" and by inversion with the pronoun -e:
waarde gij
liepte gij
zatte gij
kwamde/kwaamde gij etc
Is it still unusual to hear:
liep gij
zat gij
kwam/kwaam gij
waart gij

in the spoken language?
Do you have this -te/-de most of the times in inversions?

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: gij, ge waart

Post by Grytolle » Sat Jan 09, 2010 11:40 am

nyong wrote:Is it still unusual to hear:
liep gij
zat gij
kwam/kwaam gij
waart gij

in the spoken language?
Do you have this -te/-de most of the times in inversions?
As I said it's -e, not -te/-de. The d/t is just the third person ending

waart gij is quite normaal, zat gij ook... dunno about kwam gij/liep gij, kwaam gij is just wrong (never lengthened a without -d/-t)

depending on how natural you speak, you most of the time use the -e pronoun, with as only exception some West-Flemings

not sure what people do who speak standard Dutch but with "gij" do... kwam gij en liep gij komen mij allebei totaal onbekend voor
:-)

User avatar
heerMat
Superlid
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:21 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Dutch (Flanders)
Location: Gent

Re: Another form of you?

Post by heerMat » Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:37 pm

I'd say that (in spoken Flemish):
liep gij?
kwam gij?
wou gij?

...

are more common than:
liepte gij?
kwamde gij?
woude gij?

...
and certainly than:
liept gij?
kwamt gij?
woudt gij?

...
"Constantijnt je, ’t zaligh kijntje, Cherubijnt je, van om hoogh
D’ydelheden, hier beneden, uitlacht met een lodderoogh." (Vondel)

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: Another form of you?

Post by Grytolle » Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:48 pm

heerMat wrote:I'd say that (in spoken Flemish):
liep gij?
kwam gij?
wou gij?

...
are more common than:
liepte gij?
kwamde gij?
woude gij?

...
and certainly than:
liept gij?
kwamt gij?
woudt gij?

...
And with "ge" instead of "gij"? (which register of spoken Flemish do you refer to?)
:-)

User avatar
heerMat
Superlid
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:21 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Dutch (Flanders)
Location: Gent

Re: Another form of you?

Post by heerMat » Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:07 pm

The same for "ge" - which of course excludes -te/-de...
Which register? Don't know :-D
Standaard Verkavelingsvlaams, polite/informal, non-dialectal...
The kind of Flemish you can talk on television, quoi. But even with friends or in unpolite situations I'd never use "GE + OVT-stem of a stong verb -T/-D"... Not that is sounds 100% wrong... But it doens't sound that right neither...
That's only my opinion however!
"Constantijnt je, ’t zaligh kijntje, Cherubijnt je, van om hoogh
D’ydelheden, hier beneden, uitlacht met een lodderoogh." (Vondel)

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: Another form of you?

Post by Grytolle » Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:57 pm

heerMat wrote:The same for "ge" - which of course excludes -te/-de...
But would you also say that liep ge is more common dan liepte? I imagine it could also be very age-dependant...
:-)

User avatar
heerMat
Superlid
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:21 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Dutch (Flanders)
Location: Gent

Re: Another form of you?

Post by heerMat » Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:08 pm

oh now i see what you mean!
no, indeed, i wouldn't!
i would use forms like liepte, kwamde... in (the) most informal situations
"Constantijnt je, ’t zaligh kijntje, Cherubijnt je, van om hoogh
D’ydelheden, hier beneden, uitlacht met een lodderoogh." (Vondel)

sander
Nieuwkomer
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:38 pm
Mother tongue: Dutch (Netherlands)
Gender: Male

Re: Another form of you?

Post by sander » Sun Aug 29, 2010 7:18 pm

I live in North-Brabant in the netherlands. In my dialect we also say gij/ge and gullie. The verb always gets a t-ending or de-ending.

like

gij bent - bende (gij) ( not like in Vlaanderen)
gij maagt- maagde (gij) ( not like in Vlaanderen)
gij kwaamt- kwaamde (gij)
gij waart- waarde (gij)
gij sprongt- sprongde (gij)

same goes for gullie

Grytolle
Superlid
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:42 pm
Country of residence: Belgium
Mother tongue: Swedish
Second language: English
Third language: Dutch
Fourth language: German
Gender: Male

Re: Another form of you?

Post by Grytolle » Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:07 pm

Yeah, that's how it used to be in Flanders, but the t/d-ending has been affected by ABN influence
:-)

Post Reply