Asking Safely About Medicine | Learn Dutch in English

Sentence explanations

1. Ik weet niet zeker of ik dit medicijnetiket goed begrijp.

   I am not sure I understand this medicine label.

   weet

   know

   niet zeker

   not sure

   of

   whether

   dit

   this

   medicijnetiket

   medicine label

   goed

   well; correctly

   begrijp

   understand

   More detail

   weet is the present-tense first-person singular form of weten (“to know”): ik weet, but wij weten. Here it expresses the speaker’s knowledge or certainty, not physical recognition. Example: Ik weet het niet. — “I don’t know.” niet zeker means that the speaker lacks certainty. zeker can mean “certain” or “sure”; adding niet makes the meaning negative. The phrase niet zeker zijn is another common way to say “to be unsure,” but here niet zeker belongs with weet. of introduces an embedded yes-or-no question. In this sentence it means “whether” or “if,” not a condition such as “if it rains.” Dutch places the finite verb at the end of this subordinate clause: of ik ... begrijp. dit means “this.” Its form is the singular neuter demonstrative used with a het-word. In this sentence it points to the label identified by medicijnetiket; the demonstrative itself expresses proximity and does not mean “one.” Compare the common pair dit boek (“this book”) and deze brief (“this letter”): the choice depends on the noun’s grammatical article and number. medicijnetiket is a compound noun meaning “medicine label.” It combines medicijn (“medicine”) with etiket (“label”), and the compound is a neuter het-word: het medicijnetiket. Dutch compounds are written as one word, so the whole compound is the noun here. goed means “well” or “correctly” in this position. It describes how the understanding happens, so it functions adverbially with begrijp: the speaker is unsure whether they understand the label correctly. The related adjective goede appears before certain nouns, as in een goede uitleg (“a good explanation”), but that is a different use. begrijp is the first-person singular present form of begrijpen (“to understand”): ik begrijp, jij begrijpt, wij begrijpen. The ending and stem change are part of the verb’s present-tense forms; begrijp is not derived from the nearby noun. Example: Ik begrijp de uitleg. — “I understand the explanation.” Together, Ik weet niet zeker says “I am not sure,” and of ik dit medicijnetiket goed begrijp specifies what the uncertainty concerns: whether the speaker understands this medicine label correctly. The full utterance therefore means, “I am not sure I understand this medicine label.”

2. Bel de apotheker voordat je de volgende dosis inneemt.

   Call the pharmacist before you take the next dose.

   Bel

   call

   apotheker

   pharmacist

   voordat

   before

   je

   you

   volgende

   next

   dosis

   dose

   inneemt

   take

   More detail

   Bel is the imperative of bellen (“to call”). The stem used for this imperative is bel: Bel de apotheker. — “Call the pharmacist.” The imperative form is the same whether one person or more than one person is addressed. apotheker is a noun meaning “pharmacist.” Its plural is apothekers. The phrase de apotheker refers to the pharmacist as the person to be called; de is the definite article here. voordat introduces a clause meaning “before.” In standard Dutch, the finite verb appears at the end of this subordinate clause. Compare: Bel me voordat je vertrekt. — “Call me before you leave.” je is the unstressed second-person pronoun, “you.” Here it is the subject of the subordinate clause. This form can refer to one or more people; the sentence does not specify the number. Dutch also has the stressed form jij, but je is the normal unstressed form in this sentence. volgende means “next” or “following.” It is the form of volgend used before the singular definite noun dosis: de volgende dosis. Example: de volgende stap — “the next step.” dosis is a noun meaning “dose.” Its plural is doses: twee doses — “two doses.” In the source, de dosis is singular and definite, and volgende describes it. inneemt comes from the separable verb innemen, “to take” a substance such as medicine. With je in the present tense, the parts appear as je neemt in in a main clause: Je neemt de dosis in. — “You take the dose.” In the subordinate clause after voordat, the parts appear together at the end: voordat je de dosis inneemt — “before you take the dose.” The observed form inneemt combines the separable part in with the verb form neemt; it is not a separate ordinary verb meaning simply “take.” Together, Bel de apotheker gives the imperative “Call the pharmacist,” and voordat je de volgende dosis inneemt gives the time condition “before you take the next dose.” The complete meaning is: “Call the pharmacist before you take the next dose.”

3. Ik wil ook vragen of ik bepaalde voedingsmiddelen moet vermijden.

   I also want to ask whether I should avoid certain foods.

   Ik wil

   I want

   ook

   also

   vragen

   ask

   of

   whether

   ik

   I

   bepaalde

   certain

   voedingsmiddelen

   foods

   moet

   should

   vermijden

   avoid

   More detail

   Ik wil means “I want.” wil is the first-person singular present form of willen (“to want”): ik wil, jij wilt/wil, hij/zij wil. The infinitive after it names the desired action, as in Ik wil leren. — “I want to learn.” ook means “also” or “too.” Its position can vary for emphasis, but here it adds this wish to another point without changing the action itself. vragen is the infinitive of vragen (“to ask”). After wil, it stays in the infinitive: Ik wil vragen — “I want to ask.” Dutch commonly uses vragen of ... to introduce an indirect yes-or-no question. of means “whether” here. In this use it introduces the indirect question of ik ... moet vermijden rather than expressing a condition such as “if.” Compare the reusable pattern Ik weet niet of hij komt. — “I don’t know whether he is coming.” The second ik is the subject of the embedded question, and means “I.” It is separate from the first ik: the first is the subject of “want,” while this one is the subject of “should avoid.” bepaalde means “certain” in the sense of particular, unspecified items. It is the -e form of bepaald before the plural noun voedingsmiddelen. It does not identify which foods they are. For example, bepaalde regels means “certain rules.” voedingsmiddelen means “foods” or “food products.” It is the plural of voedingsmiddel; the plural ending is -en. The word is a compound referring to products used as food, so it is somewhat more formal or specific than the general word eten (“food” or “eating,” depending on context). moet means “should” here. It is the first-person singular present form of the modal verb moeten (“must/should”): ik moet, wij moeten. In this sentence, the fixed translation supports the recommendation-like reading “should,” not a claim that the speaker is already avoiding the foods. vermijden is the infinitive “to avoid.” With the modal moet, it remains an infinitive and appears at the end of the embedded clause: ik moet ... vermijden — “I should avoid ...” The form itself does not mark the subject here; ik and moet establish the first-person singular construction. Together, of ik bepaalde voedingsmiddelen moet vermijden means “whether I should avoid certain foods.” The structure is of + subject + modal verb + infinitive: of ik moet vermijden. Adding it after Ik wil ook vragen produces the complete meaning: “I also want to ask whether I should avoid certain foods.”

4. Dat is het controleren waard, vooral als het etiket maaltijden vermeldt.

   That is worth checking, especially if the label mentions meals.

   Dat

   that

   controleren

   checking; to check

   waard

   worth

   vooral als

   especially if

   etiket

   label

   maaltijden

   meals

   vermeldt

   mentions; lists

   More detail

   Dat means “that” here. It is a demonstrative pronoun referring to something understood from the situation or earlier context; the sentence does not identify that referent more specifically. Dutch also uses dit for “this” in the relevant demonstrative contrast. Example: Dat is handig. — “That is useful.” controleren is the infinitive “to check” or “to inspect.” In het controleren, the infinitive is used as a noun-like activity, “checking,” with het marking that nominalized activity. Example: Het controleren duurt lang. — “Checking takes a long time.” waard means “worth” in the construction iets waard zijn, “to be worth something.” In het controleren waard, it helps form “worth checking.” The thing being evaluated is Dat, while het controleren names the action. Example: Deze informatie is het bewaren waard. — “This information is worth keeping.” vooral als introduces a condition that receives special emphasis: “especially if” or “especially when.” als introduces the condition, and vooral emphasizes it. Example: Bel vooral als je hulp nodig hebt. — “Call especially if you need help.” etiket is the singular noun “label,” here understood as a product label. Its plural is etiketten. Example: Het etiket is duidelijk. — “The label is clear.” maaltijden means “meals.” It is the plural of maaltijd; the singular is een maaltijd. Example: We bereiden twee maaltijden. — “We prepare two meals.” vermeldt is the present-tense third-person singular form of vermelden, “to mention” or “to list.” Its subject here is singular het etiket, so the verb has the -t ending: het etiket vermeldt. Example: De website vermeldt de ingrediënten. — “The website lists the ingredients.” Together, Dat is het controleren waard means “That is worth checking.” vooral als het etiket maaltijden vermeldt adds the emphasized condition “especially if the label mentions or lists meals.” The complete utterance means: “That is worth checking, especially if the label mentions meals.”

5. Ik had lichte hoofdpijn nadat ik het had ingenomen.

   I had a mild headache after taking it.

   Ik

   I

   had

   had

   lichte

   mild

   hoofdpijn

   headache

   nadat

   after

   het

   it

   had

   had

   ingenomen

   taken

   More detail

   Ik is the Dutch first-person singular pronoun: “I.” It is the subject here, the person experiencing the headache. For example, Ik ben moe. means “I am tired.” The first had is the past-tense form of hebben (“to have”). Here it expresses the past state or experience of having a headache: ik had = “I had.” It is not the auxiliary for the later action; the second had has that role. lichte is the attributive form of licht (“mild” or “light”). Before the noun hoofdpijn, it has the ending -e: lichte hoofdpijn. This adjective describes the intensity of the headache, not its duration. For example, een lichte pijn means “a mild pain.” Hoofdpijn means “headache.” Dutch commonly uses this as a mass-like condition word, so it does not need a plural form in this sentence. The phrase lichte hoofdpijn therefore means “a mild headache.” Nadat is a subordinating conjunction meaning “after.” It introduces an event that occurred earlier than the event in the main clause. A reusable pattern is nadat + clause: Nadat ik had gegeten, ging ik weg. — “After I had eaten, I left.” The second had is also the past-tense form of hebben, but here it is an auxiliary. Together with ingenomen, it forms the Dutch pluperfect (past perfect): had ingenomen = “had taken.” In the past tense, had is used with singular subjects, while plural subjects use hadden; the form does not distinguish singular persons such as ik and jij here. Het is the neuter singular object pronoun “it.” In this fixed sentence, the translation confirms that it refers to something understood from the context, but the supplied sentence does not identify what that thing is. Its grammatical role is the object of ingenomen. Ingenomen is the past participle of innemen, “to take” or, in this context, “to ingest.” The form is irregular: nemen has the participle genomen, and innemen gives ingenomen. In had ingenomen, it describes taking the object before the headache occurred. For example, Zij had de tablet ingenomen. means “She had taken the tablet.” Together, nadat ik het had ingenomen means “after I had taken it.” The past perfect marks taking it as earlier than the past experience expressed by ik had lichte hoofdpijn. Combining the parts gives: “I had a mild headache after taking it.”

6. Dus dat moet ik ter sprake brengen.

   So I should bring that up.

   Dus

   so

   dat

   that

   moet ik

   I should

   ter sprake brengen

   bring up

   More detail

   Dus means “so” or “therefore” and connects this utterance to what has just been established. It is a short linking word that usually appears at the start of a conclusion: Dus ga ik. — “So I’m going.” dat means “that” here. It is a demonstrative pronoun referring to an already identifiable matter, without the sentence itself specifying exactly what that matter is. The same form can also function as a demonstrative determiner before a noun, as in dat probleem (“that problem”); in this sentence it stands independently. moet ik contains the modal verb moeten (“must, have to, should”) with the subject pronoun ik (“I”). The observed form moet is the present-tense form used with ik here; the infinitive is moeten. In a main-clause question or statement with an initial element such as Dus, the finite verb comes before the subject: moet ik. This combination expresses the speaker’s obligation or recommendation to do something, matching “I should” in the fixed translation. Compare ik moet (“I must/should”) in ordinary subject-first order. ter sprake brengen is a fixed Dutch expression meaning “to bring something up” or “to raise it as a topic.” Its literal parts are not best translated separately in this use. The lexical verb is brengen (“bring”); after the modal moet, it remains in the infinitive, so the pattern is moet ... ter sprake brengen. For example: Ik wil het probleem ter sprake brengen. — “I want to bring up the problem.” Together, Dus marks a conclusion, dat identifies the matter to be discussed, moet ik expresses that the speaker should do it, and ter sprake brengen supplies the idiomatic action. The whole utterance therefore means “So I should bring that up.”

7. Vraag of het een bijwerking kan zijn en op welke waarschuwingssignalen je moet letten.

   Ask whether it could be a side effect and what warning signs to watch for.

   Vraag

   ask

   bijwerking

   side effect

   kan zijn

   can be

   waarschuwingssignalen

   warning signs

   letten

   pay attention

   More detail

   Vraag is the singular imperative of vragen (“to ask”), giving a direct instruction. Do not confuse it with the present-tense plural vragen; in the present tense, singular forms include ik vraag and jij/hij vraagt, while the plural form is wij/jullie/zij vragen. Example: Vraag het aan de arts. — “Ask the doctor about it.” bijwerking means “side effect,” especially an unwanted effect of medicine or treatment. It is a compound noun; its plural is bijwerkingen. Example: Deze bijwerking is zeldzaam. — “This side effect is rare.” kan zijn combines kan, a present form of kunnen, with zijn, the infinitive of “to be.” With het as subject, it expresses the possibility that “it” is a side effect. The specific referent of het is not identified in the supplied sentence. Example: Het kan ernstig zijn. — “It may be serious.” waarschuwingssignalen means “warning signs.” It is the plural of waarschuwingssignaal, a compound noun for signs that warn of a possible problem. Example: Let op waarschuwingssignalen. — “Watch for warning signs.” letten means “to pay attention.” With op, the construction letten op can mean “to watch for” or “to pay attention to.” In the source, op comes before welke waarschuwingssignalen, while the infinitive letten is at the end of that subordinate clause: op welke waarschuwingssignalen je moet letten. Example: Ik let op de signalen. — “I pay attention to the signs.” moet is a present form of moeten and expresses obligation here. With je, it forms je moet (“you must/should”); je is an unstressed second-person pronoun, and this sentence does not identify a particular addressee. In standard Dutch, jullie moeten is the usual plural “you must,” rather than je moet. Example: Je moet goed opletten. — “You must pay close attention.” The utterance first gives the instruction Vraag, then introduces the indirect yes-or-no question of het een bijwerking kan zijn (“whether it could be a side effect”). of introduces that indirect question, and kan zijn is placed at the end of its clause. The second part asks op welke waarschuwingssignalen je moet letten (“which warning signs to watch for”): welke selects the signs being asked about, and moet letten expresses the required attention. Together, the sentence means: “Ask whether it could be a side effect and what warning signs to watch for.”

8. Gissen voelt riskant, vooral bij medicijnen.

   Guessing feels risky, especially with medicine.

   Gissen

   guessing

   voelt

   feels

   riskant

   risky

   vooral

   especially

   bij

   with; in the context of

   medicijnen

   medicines

   More detail

   Gissen is the infinitive of gissen, “to guess.” Here the infinitive is used as the subject: the act of guessing is what feels risky. Because it begins the sentence, it is capitalized; this does not make it a different verb form. A reusable pattern is Infinitive + voelt ... for saying that doing something feels a certain way. voelt is the present-tense form of voelen, “to feel,” for a third-person singular subject. The subject here is the activity gissen, treated as one activity. Voelen can describe a physical sensation, but in this sentence voelt introduces an evaluation or impression. riskant means “risky” and is a predicative adjective after voelt: iets voelt riskant means “something feels risky.” Dutch predicative adjectives normally do not take the attributive -e ending here. A useful contrast is veilig (“safe”): Het voelt veilig means “It feels safe.” vooral means “especially” or “particularly.” It highlights the situation that follows rather than changing the basic claim. In this sentence, the general feeling about guessing is presented as especially relevant in connection with medicines. bij is a preposition meaning “with” or “in situations involving” here. The pattern bij + noun can identify the context in which something applies; its meaning must be determined from that context, so bij medicijnen is naturally “with medicines” or “when dealing with medicines.” medicijnen is the plural of medicijn, “medicine.” The plural ending is -en. Dutch can use the plural for medicines as a general category, while the English translation may use the mass noun “medicine.” Together, Gissen voelt riskant says “Guessing feels risky.” vooral bij medicijnen narrows that evaluation to situations involving medicines. The complete utterance therefore means: “Guessing feels risky, especially with medicine.”

9. Een deskundige kan de risico's duidelijker uitleggen.

   A professional can explain the risks more clearly.

   deskundige

   expert; professional

   kan

   can; is able to

   risico's

   risks

   duidelijker

   more clearly

   uitleggen

   to explain

   More detail

   deskundige means “professional” or “expert” here: a person with relevant knowledge. It can also function as an adjective in other contexts, but in this sentence it is a noun. The article een makes the noun phrase indefinite and nonspecific; it does not by itself assert a numerical count. kan is the present-tense form of kunnen used here for the subject een deskundige, and it expresses ability. With a modal verb such as kunnen, the other verb remains in the infinitive and appears later in this sentence. Example: Ik kan helpen. — “I can help.” risico's means “risks.” Its singular is risico; the apostrophe is part of the plural spelling. Example: We bespreken de risico's. — “We discuss the risks.” The article de belongs to the noun phrase and marks the definite plural noun here. duidelijker means “more clearly” in this sentence. It is the comparative form of duidelijk (“clear; clearly”); here the comparison applies to the manner of explaining, not to the risks. Dutch commonly forms this comparison with -er: duidelijk → duidelijker. Example: Leg het duidelijker uit. — “Explain it more clearly.” uitleggen means “to explain.” It is an infinitive and follows kan. The verb is separable in some finite constructions: Ik leg het uit. — “I explain it.” After kan, however, the infinitive remains together: Ik kan het uitleggen. — “I can explain it.” Together, Een deskundige identifies a nonspecific professional, kan expresses this person's ability, de risico's is the definite object being explained, duidelijker describes the manner comparatively, and uitleggen supplies the action. The whole utterance therefore means: “A professional can explain the risks more clearly.”

10. Ik kan de vragen opschrijven voordat ik bel.

    I can write down the questions before calling.

    Ik kan

    I can

    vragen

    questions

    opschrijven

    write down

    voordat

    before

    bel

    call

    More detail

    Ik kan means “I can.” kan is the present-tense form of kunnen for ik; it expresses ability or possibility here. In a main clause, the modal verb occupies the finite-verb position, while the other verb remains an infinitive later in the clause. For example: Ik kan komen. — “I can come.” vragen means “questions.” It is the plural of vraag (“question”); with the definite article, the phrase de vragen means “the questions.” Dutch plural nouns commonly use de, regardless of whether their singular article is de or het. opschrijven means “to write down.” This is a separable verb: its infinitive is opschrijven, while in a finite main-clause form the parts can separate, as in Ik schrijf de vragen op. — “I write the questions down.” After the modal kan, the infinitive stays together at the end: Ik kan de vragen opschrijven. voordat introduces a subordinate time clause meaning “before.” The event in that clause provides the time boundary for the main action. Dutch normally places the finite verb at the end of this subordinate clause, as in voordat ik vertrek — “before I leave.” bel is the first-person singular present form of bellen, “to call.” In the supplied sentence, the subject of the subordinate clause is ik, so ik bel means “I call”; bel itself is the verb form, not an imperative in this context. For example: Ik bel voordat ik vertrek. — “I call before I leave.” Together, Ik kan de vragen opschrijven says “I can write down the questions.” voordat ik bel adds the time relation “before I call.” The complete utterance therefore means: “I can write down the questions before calling.”

11. Daardoor zou het gesprek gemakkelijker te volgen moeten zijn.

    That should make the call easier to follow.

    Daardoor

    because of that

    zou

    would

    gesprek

    call

    gemakkelijker

    easier

    volgen

    follow

    moeten

    need to

    zijn

    be

    More detail

    Daardoor means “because of that” or “as a result of that.” It points back to an already mentioned situation; here, the preceding context supports the idea of writing down the questions. Dutch also uses hierdoor for “because of this,” with a nearer demonstrative reference. zou is the past-tense form of zullen used here to express a tentative or conditional result: “would” or, in this translation, “should.” The form is not a simple past statement about making something easier. A useful pattern is zou ... kunnen = “could ...” and zou ... moeten = “should ...” or “would have to ...,” depending on the construction. het gesprek refers here to the call or conversation. gesprek is a neuter noun, as shown by het; its basic meaning is a conversation, while the fixed translation makes “call” the intended context-specific rendering. The noun is singular in this sentence. Example: We hebben een gesprek. — “We are having a conversation.” gemakkelijker means “easier” and is the comparative form of gemakkelijk (“easy”). The comparison is carried by gemakkelijker, not by gesprek: gemakkelijk → gemakkelijker → het gemakkelijkst (“easy” → “easier” → “the easiest”). Example: Deze uitleg is gemakkelijker. — “This explanation is easier.” volgen means “to follow.” In te volgen, the infinitive follows te, forming an infinitival phrase meaning “to follow.” Here, the thing being followed is the conversation or call: it should be easier to follow it. The form volgen is the base infinitive; it is not inflected for a subject in this construction. Example: Het is moeilijk te volgen. — “It is difficult to follow.” moeten expresses necessity or expectation. With zou in zou ... moeten ..., it contributes the intended “should”: an expected result rather than a direct command. Its base form is moeten; a present-tense example is Ik moet gaan. — “I have to go.” In the fixed sentence, moeten is part of the modal construction and does not mean that someone is literally required to perform an independently stated action. zijn is the infinitive “to be.” It completes the expression gemakkelijker te volgen zijn, literally organizing the idea as “be easier to follow.” Dutch places the infinitive zijn at the end of this clause. Example: De tekst is gemakkelijk te volgen. — “The text is easy to follow.” Together, Daardoor introduces the result, and zou ... moeten zijn frames that result as expected or likely: “should be.” het gesprek is the call or conversation, while gemakkelijker te volgen says that following it will require less effort. The whole utterance therefore means: “That should make the call easier to follow.”