Building support for policy changes | Learn Dutch in English

Sentence explanations

1. Beleid werkt meestal niet als werknemers het gevoel hebben dat veranderingen aan hen worden opgelegd.

   Policies tend to fail when employees feel changes are being imposed on them.

   Beleid

   policy; policies

   werkt

   works; is effective

   meestal

   usually

   niet

   not

   als

   when; if

   werknemers

   employees

   het gevoel hebben

   to feel; to have the feeling

   veranderingen

   changes

   aan hen

   on them

   worden opgelegd

   are imposed

   More detail

   Beleid means “policy” here in a general sense; English often uses the plural “policies” for this generic meaning. Dutch beleid is a neuter noun and commonly functions as a mass or general term. Beleidsmaatregelen means “policy measures,” not the plural form of beleid; beleiden is a possible plural in some contexts but is less common than context-specific expressions such as beleidsmaatregelen. werkt is the present-tense form of werken, “to work” or “to function.” Here it means “is effective.” The -t form agrees with the singular noun beleid: beleid werkt; compare ik werk and wij werken. meestal means “usually” or “in most cases.” It is an adverb and does not change form. Example: Dat gebeurt meestal means “That usually happens.” niet is the ordinary Dutch negation word “not.” Together, werkt meestal niet says that the policy or policies generally do not work. als introduces the condition or situation in which the main statement applies. It is naturally “when” here; in a more hypothetical condition it can also mean “if.” A clause introduced by als normally places its finite verb toward the end, as in als werknemers ... hebben. werknemers means “employees” and is the plural of werknemer. The plural ending is -s. It is the subject of the als-clause, so the verb is plural hebben, not singular heeft. het gevoel hebben is a reusable expression meaning “to feel” or literally “to have the feeling.” Example: Ik heb het gevoel dat hij gelijk heeft means “I feel that he is right.” In the fixed sentence, hebben agrees with plural werknemers. The following dat-clause states what they feel. veranderingen means “changes” and is the plural of verandering. Example: een verandering means “a change.” In this sentence, the changes are the thing being imposed. aan hen means “on them” in the passive construction used here. Hen is the stressed third-person plural pronoun used after a preposition; an unstressed counterpart is commonly ze. The meaning of aan here comes from the construction, so the whole phrase is translated as “on them.” worden opgelegd is a present passive construction. Worden is the plural present form of worden, and opgelegd is the past participle of the separable verb opleggen, “to impose.” Active: Men legt veranderingen op means “People impose changes.” Passive: Veranderingen worden opgelegd means “Changes are imposed.” Because veranderingen is plural, the auxiliary is worden; with a singular subject, it is wordt opgelegd. Together, beleid werkt meestal niet means that policies generally fail or are ineffective. als werknemers het gevoel hebben introduces the situation, and dat veranderingen aan hen worden opgelegd says that the employees feel changes are being imposed on them. The complete meaning is: “Policies tend to fail when employees feel changes are being imposed on them.”

2. Mensen passen zich eerder aan als ze echt iets te zeggen hebben over het proces.

   People are more likely to adjust when they have a real say in the process.

   Mensen

   people

   passen … zich … aan

   adapt; adjust

   eerder

   more likely

   echt

   really

   iets te zeggen hebben

   have a real say

   proces

   process

   More detail

   Mensen means “people” here. Its base form is mens; Mensen is the plural form. The plural subject is why the finite verb later appears as passen and hebben, rather than singular forms. Example: Mensen leren snel. — “People learn quickly.” passen zich aan is the separated form of the reflexive verb zich aanpassen, “to adapt” or “to adjust.” In a finite Dutch clause, aanpassen can split: zich aanpassen → passen zich aan. Here zich refers back to the plural subject Mensen, so the people adjust themselves or adapt. Example: De organisatie past zich aan. — “The organization adapts.” eerder gives the clause the sense “more likely” here, not the time meaning “earlier.” It presents adaptation as a more likely result under the condition that follows. The same form can have a temporal meaning in another sentence, as in Ze kwamen eerder. — “They arrived earlier.” echt intensifies the following idea: the people have a genuine or meaningful say, rather than merely a nominal opportunity to speak. It can also intensify other descriptions or statements. Example: Dat helpt echt. — “That really helps.” iets te zeggen hebben is a reusable Dutch construction. Literally, it contains iets “something,” te zeggen “to say,” and hebben “to have,” but in this context it means to have a say or some influence. The pattern iets te zeggen hebben over ... expresses having influence or decision-making input concerning something. In this sentence, hebben is the present plural form used with ze, which the fixed translation identifies as referring to Mensen. Example: Werknemers hebben iets te zeggen over het plan. — “Employees have a say in the plan.” proces means “process.” In the sentence it appears with the definite article as het proces; its plural is processen. The phrase over het proces specifies what the people have a say in. Example: Het proces duurt lang. — “The process takes a long time.” Together, Mensen passen zich eerder aan says that people are more likely to adapt. als introduces the condition ze echt iets te zeggen hebben over het proces: they have a genuine say in the process. The whole utterance therefore means that people are more likely to adjust when they have meaningful influence over the process.

3. We zouden om suggesties kunnen vragen voordat we het plan definitief maken.

   We could invite suggestions before we finalize the plan.

   We zouden

   we would

   suggesties

   suggestions

   kunnen

   can; be able to

   vragen

   ask

   voordat

   before

   plan

   plan

   definitief maken

   finalize

   More detail

   We zouden means “we would” here. zouden is the first-person plural form of zullen used for a conditional or tentative proposal. The subject is we, and the form is plural because of that subject. Together with the later modal kunnen, the pattern We zouden ... kunnen expresses “We could”: it presents an option rather than stating that the action will happen. suggesties means “suggestions.” Its singular is suggestie, and suggesties is the plural. om suggesties vragen is a useful pattern meaning “to ask for suggestions”; here om introduces what is being requested. kunnen is the infinitive of kunnen, meaning “can” or “be able to.” In this sentence it combines with zouden to form zouden ... kunnen, meaning “could.” Dutch modal verbs are followed by an infinitive: We kunnen wachten means “We can wait.” vragen is the infinitive of vragen, “to ask.” In om suggesties vragen, the requested thing follows om. Example: Ik vraag om hulp. — “I ask for help.” voordat means “before” and introduces a subordinate clause. In the clause voordat we het plan definitief maken, the finite verb maken comes at the end, as is usual in this type of Dutch subordinate clause. plan means “plan.” Its plural is plannen, not plan; the article also changes: het plan means “the plan,” while de plannen means “the plans.” In this sentence, het plan is rendered as “the plan.” definitief maken is the Dutch pattern for “to finalize,” literally “to make final.” definitief describes the resulting status, while maken is the infinitive of maken, “to make.” Example: We maken de afspraak definitief. — “We finalize the agreement.” Together, We zouden ... kunnen vragen gives the tentative proposal “We could ask,” and om suggesties specifies what would be requested. voordat we het plan definitief maken means “before we finalize the plan.” The complete utterance is therefore: “We could invite suggestions before we finalize the plan.”

4. Dat zou praktische problemen aan het licht brengen die we van hieruit misschien niet zien.

   That would bring up practical issues we might not see from here.

   Dat

   that

   zou

   would

   praktische

   practical

   problemen

   problems

   aan het licht brengen

   bring to light

   die

   that; which

   van hieruit

   from here

   misschien

   perhaps

   niet

   not

   zien

   see

   More detail

   Dat means “that” here as a demonstrative pronoun. The sentence does not identify a more specific referent for it, so learn the reusable pattern dat = “that” when pointing to something treated as singular or to an idea. zou is the form of zullen used with a singular subject. With an infinitive, zou commonly expresses “would”: Dat zou helpen = “That would help.” The form belongs to the conditional construction; it is not the verb meaning “bring” itself. praktische is the adjective praktisch (“practical”) with the attributive -e ending before plural problemen. The adjective is not derived from the noun: praktisch describes something useful or relevant in practice. problemen is the plural of probleem (“problem”): een probleem → problemen. In this sentence it means practical problems or issues. The form is plural because the sentence refers to more than one issue. aan het licht brengen is a fixed Dutch expression meaning “to bring to light” or “to reveal.” Its literal parts should be learned as one reusable construction here. For example: Het onderzoek bracht nieuwe feiten aan het licht. — “The investigation revealed new facts.” die is a relative pronoun introducing information about problemen. Because its antecedent is plural, Dutch uses die here. A related contrast is het probleem dat ... — “the problem that ...”; dat is used with a singular neuter antecedent, while die is used with a plural antecedent or a singular common-gender antecedent. we is the subject of the relative clause and means “we.” It is the unstressed form commonly used in ordinary speech and writing alongside the more emphatic wij. van hieruit means “from here,” with hieruit presenting the viewpoint or starting point as “out of/from here.” The phrase describes the position from which something is seen, rather than changing who sees it. misschien means “perhaps” or “maybe.” It marks uncertainty about the situation described by the clause; it does not itself negate the clause. niet is the ordinary Dutch negator “not.” Here it negates zien, so the meaning is “might not see,” not simply “maybe see.” zien means “to see.” In the clause die we ... zien, we is the subject and zien is the present-tense plural form: ik zie, but we zien. Dutch plural present forms often have the same spelling as the infinitive. Together, Dat zou ... brengen gives “That would bring ... to light.” The noun phrase praktische problemen supplies what would be revealed. The relative clause die we van hieruit misschien niet zien describes those problems: they are problems that we perhaps do not see from here. The complete meaning is: “That would bring to light practical problems that we might not see from here.”

5. Het geeft mensen ook meer reden om de uitkomst belangrijk te vinden.

   It also gives people more reason to care about the outcome.

   Het

   it

   geeft

   gives

   mensen

   people

   ook

   also

   meer

   more

   reden

   reason

   de uitkomst

   the outcome

   belangrijk

   important

   vinden

   find; consider

   More detail

   Het is a singular neuter subject pronoun meaning “it” here. The translation identifies the subject as “it,” while the exact thing it refers to is supplied by the surrounding discourse rather than by this sentence alone. geeft is the present-tense third-person singular form of geven, “to give.” The singular subject het selects geeft; with a plural subject, Dutch uses geven. Example: Het geeft ons tijd. — “It gives us time.” mensen means “people” and is the recipient of what is given. The same noun can also refer to people in other grammatical roles; its form does not change here to mark this role. ook means “also” and adds this statement to something already established. Its position here places it after the recipient mensen and before meer reden. meer is the comparative form of veel: veel “much/many,” meer “more,” meest “most.” In this sentence it modifies reden, expressing an increased amount or degree of reason rather than a separate kind of reason. reden is a noun meaning “reason.” The phrase meer reden om ... te vinden means “more reason to consider ...”. Example: Dat is een goede reden om te wachten. — “That is a good reason to wait.” om ... te vinden is a Dutch infinitive construction. te marks the infinitive vinden, while om begins the larger om ... te clause; words belonging to the clause can occur between them. After reden, this clause specifies what the reason concerns. It is not necessary to interpret it as a separate purpose clause here. de uitkomst means “the outcome.” De is the definite article, and uitkomst is the noun. Example: De uitkomst is onzeker. — “The outcome is uncertain.” belangrijk means “important.” Here it is used as a complement of vinden in the pattern iets belangrijk vinden, literally “find something important,” meaning “consider something important.” It describes how the object is judged, not the noun’s inflection. vinden is the infinitive of the verb meaning “to find”; in iets belangrijk vinden, it commonly means “to consider” or “to regard.” The object is de uitkomst, and belangrijk gives the evaluation applied to that object. Example: Ik vind dit plan belangrijk. — “I consider this plan important.” Together, het geeft mensen means “it gives people,” ook meer reden adds “also more reason,” and om de uitkomst belangrijk te vinden states what that reason is for: considering the outcome important. The complete meaning is: “It also gives people more reason to care about the outcome.”

6. Een werkbaar plan vereist nog steeds dat mensen zich erbij betrokken voelen.

   A workable plan still needs people to feel invested.

   werkbaar

   workable

   plan

   plan

   vereist

   requires

   nog steeds

   still

   mensen

   people

   zich erbij betrokken voelen

   feel invested

   More detail

   werkbaar describes something that can function effectively in practice: “workable.” It is the adjective related to werken (“to work”), but it does not mean simply “working” in every context. Its comparative is werkbaarder (“more workable”), and its superlative can be het meest werkbaar (“the most workable”). plan is the noun “plan.” Its plural is plannen. In this sentence, it is the subject: the plan is the thing that requires something. vereist means “requires” here. It is the present-tense form of vereisen with a singular third-person subject: het plan vereist (“the plan requires”). With a plural subject, use vereisen, as in De plannen vereisen tijd (“The plans require time”). nog steeds means “still,” emphasizing that the requirement remains true. It is a fixed adverbial expression; do not treat nog by itself as the complete meaning “still” in every context. mensen means “people,” the plural of mens (“person/human being”). It is the subject of the clause after dat. The singular is een mens or de mens, depending on the intended meaning and context. zich erbij betrokken voelen expresses “feel invested” or, more literally in this context, “feel involved in it.” voelen is the infinitive/base form “to feel”; in this clause it appears as the finite plural form voelen because mensen is plural. zich voelen is a reflexive pattern meaning “feel,” while betrokken adds the sense of being involved or committed. erbij refers generally to participation in the matter already being discussed; the fixed sentence does not identify a more specific object. The structure is Een werkbaar plan vereist nog steeds dat ...: “A workable plan still requires that ...” The dat-clause states the condition the plan requires. Inside it, mensen is the subject, and zich erbij betrokken voelen says that those people feel involved in the matter. Together, the utterance means: “A workable plan still needs people to feel invested.”

7. Het moeilijke is om de discussie constructief en concreet te houden.

   The hard part is keeping the discussion constructive and specific.

   Het moeilijke

   the difficult part

   de discussie

   the discussion

   constructief

   constructive

   concreet

   specific; concrete

   te houden

   to keep

   More detail

   Het moeilijke uses the adjective moeilijke as a noun-like expression: “the difficult part” or “what is difficult.” The -e form appears because the adjective is substantivized with het; it is not modifying a separately stated noun here. A useful pattern is het + adjective + -e for “the … part/thing,” for example: Het belangrijke is de timing. — “The important thing is the timing.” de discussie means “the discussion.” Discussie is a common-gender noun, so its definite article is de. The plural is discussies; the article does not by itself tell us whether the noun is singular or plural, but this form is singular in the fixed sentence because the sentence presents one discussion as the object being kept in a certain state. constructief describes the desired state of the discussion: constructive. Here it is an adjective used after houden as an object complement. In this use it has no -e ending: een constructieve discussie means “a constructive discussion” before a noun, while de discussie constructief houden means “keep the discussion constructive.” concreet adds a second desired quality: specific or concrete. It is coordinated with constructief, so both words describe de discussie. As with constructief, the form has no -e ending in this complement position. Before a noun, the form can be different: een concrete vraag means “a specific question.” te houden contains the infinitive houden, “to keep,” with te marking the infinitive in this construction. The verb houden has several uses; here it means maintaining something in a particular condition, not simply holding it in one’s hands. Its present-tense forms include ik houd and jij/hij/zij houdt; the infinitive is houden. Together with the preceding om, the ending forms om ... te houden, a Dutch infinitive construction meaning “to keep …” or “for keeping …”. The material between om and te houden is the object and its two descriptions: de discussie constructief en concreet. Thus om de discussie constructief en concreet te houden means “to keep the discussion constructive and specific.” The complete sentence is structured as Het moeilijke is om ... te houden: “The difficult part is to keep …” or, more naturally here, “The hard part is keeping …”. The discussion is the thing being kept, and constructief and concreet state the two qualities it should retain. The full meaning is: “The hard part is keeping the discussion constructive and specific.”

8. Dan moeten we gerichte vragen stellen in plaats van om algemene feedback te vragen.

   Then we should ask focused questions instead of making a broad feedback request.

   Dan

   then

   moeten we

   we should

   gerichte

   focused

   vragen

   questions

   stellen

   ask

   in plaats van

   instead of

   om … te

   to

   algemene

   broad

   feedback

   feedback

   vragen

   ask

   More detail

   Dan means “then” here and links this recommendation to what was just discussed. It is a time/discourse adverb and normally does not change form. moeten we expresses “we should” in this sentence. moeten is the present-tense form used with we; it is a modal verb followed by an infinitive. The subject is we, and stellen supplies the infinitive that completes this modal construction. For example: We moeten luisteren. — “We should listen.” gerichte means “focused” or “targeted” here. Its base form is gericht; the -e form appears before the plural noun vragen in this noun phrase. The adjective describes the questions as focused, not the act of asking. vragen means “questions” here. In this position, after gerichte, it is the plural noun vraag (“question”). Dutch also has an infinitive vragen meaning “to ask,” so the surrounding position is important: here it is the noun, while the final vragen is the verb. stellen is the infinitive of stellen, “to put” or “place,” but in the reusable collocation vragen stellen it means “to ask questions.” Dutch commonly uses this combination where English uses the single verb “ask.” Because it follows moeten, it remains in the infinitive: moeten we ... stellen. in plaats van means “instead of.” It introduces the alternative that should not be chosen. For example: In plaats van te wachten, beginnen we. — “Instead of waiting, we start.” The separated om and te belong to the construction om ... te vragen: om comes before the intervening object phrase, and te directly precedes the infinitive. This construction expresses “to ask for ...” here. The full unit is om algemene feedback te vragen, not just the two isolated words. For example: We komen om advies te vragen. — “We come to ask for advice.” algemene means “general” or “broad” here. Its base form is algemeen; the -e form is used before feedback in this phrase. It contrasts with gerichte: gerichte vragen seek specific information, while algemene feedback is broad rather than narrowly targeted. feedback is a noun meaning “feedback.” It is a loanword used for comments or evaluation. In this sentence it is the thing being requested; algemene specifies that the feedback is broad. The final vragen is the infinitive of vragen, “to ask” or “request.” Here it means asking for feedback, as in feedback vragen. This differs from the earlier vragen stellen: vragen stellen means asking questions, whereas feedback vragen means requesting feedback. Together, Dan moeten we gerichte vragen stellen means “Then we should ask focused questions.” in plaats van om algemene feedback te vragen gives the alternative: “instead of making a broad feedback request.” The whole utterance therefore means: “Then we should ask focused questions instead of making a broad feedback request.”