Zijn or hebben - strong verbs

[Bert]

@ngonyama & Quetzal
Vermoord elkaar toch niet.

Another discrepancy I have found is that the list shows the past tense of behangen to be 'behangde' whereas all dictionaries I have consulted have the past tense to be 'behing'.

Yes: behangen - behing - behangen. If you're not sure about something, you can use http://woordenlijst.org/ as the ultimate authority.

[radamfi]

You should not rely blindly on Wiktionary - there will be mistakes from time to time, it happens.

That does sound like sensible advice, although in this case the 'error' is in

http://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=Verbs.Ir03#H

Is 'behangen' one of those strong verbs you mention that is often conjugated weakly? When Bieneke sorts the strong verbs by conjugation pattern on the next page, she still classes behangen as a verb with a regular past tense, so maybe she really did genuinely think that was the past tense and it was not a typo.

Obviously as a native English speaker things would be so much easier if there were no strong verbs (and of course, only one gender)!

[radamfi]

Yes: behangen - behing - behangen. If you're not sure about something, you can use http://woordenlijst.org/ as the ultimate authority.

Thanks for that tip. Is it worth asking Bieneke to change the website for behangen and barsten? I don't want to sound like I am complaining, as after all she has set up this website and forum and for no money.

[Joke]

You're right that behangde is wrong, but what's wrong with barsten?

[radamfi]

You're right that behangde is wrong, but what's wrong with barsten?

Barsten always uses zijn in the past participle, so should be marked with an asterisk (*)

[Joke]

Oh that's right. I only looked at the conjugations.
It's now corrected.

[radamfi]

Great! Just realised the next page might need changing as well.

http://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=Verbs.ir04

Behangen is currently in the "Regular past, past participle gets -en" category when it should be in the "a - i - a, past participle gets -en" category.

[Joke]

Fixed.
I see that there are no other verbs with prefixes in this list, so actually behangen doesn't need to be mentioned next to hangen. Otherwise, it should also mention e.g. ontvangen in addition to vangen.
But I don't think that's a big problem.

[radamfi]

Actually, Joke, that is a good point. The only reason why behangen is mentioned at all is because

Only derived verbs that are conjugated differently or take another auxiliary verb in the past participle, are mentioned separately.

Now it is conjugated the same as hangen, I suppose behangen could be removed from both pages. I can see someone even more pedantic than me pointing this out in a few years! I have only learned the strong verbs starting with 'b' so far so I haven't noticed hangen yet But yes, not a big problem.