In Dutch, there are some words that have the same meaning but are used in different ways. Below you will find three example pairs and some tips to help you know when to use which. It is worth remembering that there will always be exceptions, so these are more guidelines than hard and fast rules.
Verstaan vs. Begrijpen
While both verstaan and begrijpen mean ‘to understand’, there is a difference in the context that they are used.
Verstaan is used when you are talking about something that you hear. If you can’t understand someone because they need to talk louder (harder) or more clearly (duidelijker), then you would use verstaan. It is also used when discussing understanding or knowing/being able to comprehend another language.
–> Ik ben een beetje doof, ik versta u niet. (I am a little bit deaf, I don’t understand you.)
–> Ik versta geen Arabisch. Dat heb ik op school nooit geleerd. (I don’t understand Arabic. I never learned that in school.)
Begrijpen is used when you are talking about actually understanding the meaning of something.
–> Ik ben niet doof, dus is versta u heel goed, maar ik begrijp u niet. U praat nonsens! (I am not deaf, so I understand [hear] you very good but I don’t understand you. You talk nonsense!)
Betekenen vs. Bedoelen
Betekenen and bedoelen both can be translated as ‘to mean’.
Betekenen is used in situations where something can be interpreted, more or less, the same by everyone (e.g. a traffic sign). Most particularly, beteken is used in relation to words.
–> ‘Melk’ betekent ‘milk’, begrijpt u dat? (‘Melk’ means ‘milk’, do you understand that?)
Bedoelen, on the other hand, is more people related and used to reflect a certain intention someone has when stating or saying something.
–> Wat bedoelt Marie? (What does Marie mean?)
Weten vs. Kennen
Weten and kennen, both which mean ‘to know’ are one of the hardest pairs to explain and understand. So, don’t feel bad if you find this one challenging.
Kennen is used more often in relation to being aquainted with someone or something. Kennen is also a transitive verb, meaning it needs an object.
–> Kent u meneer Ruisdaal? (Do you know Mr. Ruisdaal?)
Weten is used, usually, to refer to facts. It is a transitive verb, so does not require an object and is often in sentences with sub-clauses.
–> Ik weet waar het museum is. (I know where the museum is.)
Answers from Tuesday’s Post:
1. Zij zegt dat het weer bijna altijd goed is.
2. Zij vraagt of jullie twee keer per dag met de hond lopen.
3. Zij vraagt hoe het thuis gaat.
Practice:
Fill in begrijpen, verstaan, betekenen, bedoelen, weten or kennen.
1. Dat kind praat heel zacht. Ik _____ haar niet.
2. Welk woord _______ u precies?
3. _____ u het schilderij ‘De Nachtwacht van Rembrandt?
4. _____ u misschien waar het hangt?
5. Wat ________ ‘zout’?
6. Ik hou niet van Picasso. Ik ______ hem niet.
Comments:
Hulper:
“Kennen is used more often in relation to being aquainted with someone or something. Kennen is also a transitive verb, meaning it needs an object.
Weten is used, usually, to refer to facts. It is a transitive verb, so does not require an object and is often in sentences with sub-clauses.”
Don’t you mean to say that:
“Weten” is intransitive and doesn’t require an object
OR
“Weten” is transitive and does require an object
I don’t actually know the answer, but the logic seems off.
John:
Could you add some examples of using “weten”