Please Comment. Please report errors.
there is a typo in level 3: “kook = (I) make” (cook)
Thanks for reporting. Fixed that
You can also report words that you always mix up because they are similar. I’ll add an answer hint or adjust translations.
scheid = (I) seperate [long form, formal, common] ; the same for “schei = seperate”
(bzw, die Aussprache für “metodologisch” (in “Academic Dutch”) klingt ziemlich Deutsch :))
Fixed both separate and methodologisch. Thx for reporting.
First, great job on the course! Thanks for the hard work.
I would like to report a minor audio issue: under regular past participles, the word “gehaast” has the audio for “gestuurd” I found another one last week and will report it here when I come across it again.
I nearly forgot, in regular past participles, I noticed two more things:
- “(is) veranderd” - having the () around “is” is kind of annoying to remember since no other word has it. I get that there may be a concern since the audio is “is of heeft,” so no worries if there is no desire to change things.
- I would double check the translation " is gegroeid - grew." The past participle of grow in English is “grown.”
Thx for the kind words and for reporting mistakes. Errors are often obvious but for soemone reason I, the course creator, constantly ignore them.
I corrected that. Thx for telling.
Sure. Fixed that. What was I thinking?
Yep. There are some words in Dutch that can have both heeft and is as an auxiliary based on the “character” of the verb in the given context. There are a dozen or so (23! ) words in this course. Elements in brackets are usually optional in Memrise (if they have not tinkered with the input since last time I checked). Thus, you can just type verandered and it will be accepted. What I am about to do (as soon as possible): I’ll add alternative answers to the verbs for all “bracket-verbs”. Soon, it will accept is veranderd, heeft veranderd, verandered (perhaps some more alternatives - I have to think about that). Thx for giving me feedback on this issue.
I’ve now redrafted that section.
- All “hebben participles” now acccept both (e. g.) heeft gesproken and gesproken. Heeft gesproken is displayed as an alternative answer.
- All “pure is participles” are unchanged. They still only accept (e. g.) is gevallen. I thought about perhaps accepting gevallen but that seems too easy …
- All “hebben/zijn (2-way) particles” now accept a variety of answers. For example, (is) gezwommen now accepts:
- (is) gezwommen
- heeft gezwommen
- is gezwommen
- is of heeft gezwommen
- (heeft) gezwommen
- () gezwommen_
- heeft of is gezwommen
- is gezwommen, heeft gezwommen
- is gezwommen heeft gezwommen
- is heeft gezwommen
- heeft is gezwommen
- → main entry
- → displayed as an alternative answer
- → hidden but accepted for an answer
Not sure whether that helps to mitigate some issues but it certainly won’t do any harm …
Thanks for the updates @Robert-Alexander! This is great. I will give it a go and let you know how the course feels
I am liking the updates! Thanks again. If you do not mind, I want to propose an idea:
I am still getting caught up on words/phrases like “is geslaagd” because I am forgetting to add “is.” I am wondering how you feel about modifying the translation of “verb+past participle” to include the verb and not just the past participle. For instances: from “succeeded” to “has succeeded.” Though if you think this is too much work, or a terrible idea , that is okay too!
The more feedback, the better.
You mean, you keep entries like: gesneeuwd “snowed” and gestudeerd “studied” like they were but change something like _is geslaagd “succeeded” to is geslaagd “has succeeded”? Is that what you propose?
Well, ain’t that too easy? I mean we also need to learn which verbs use is and which use heeft. If we indicate this by adding an “has” to the is-words, we already know it’s an is-word right? I still contemplate the idea to allow just geslaagd for an answer, so that you can safely omit the is. But I’m still not sure about that. I mean, from what I understand, you’re more interested in not getting “punished” when forgetting to add the is rather than a more strict approach that always forces you to enter is. That’s totally legit. I get this. Not everyone wants the same focus on details 'cause different people have different learning goals.
Perhaps you could comment on whether we should try this out (allowing to just answer geslaagd instead of is geslaagd). I mean, we could at least test this. And you (or other users) report in a couple of weeks how that works out for them.
Right, I think you got it: if the Dutch part omits (has) the verb, omit (add) the verb to the English translation, but only as the default answer. This is just for consistency.
I do not think people should be punished for omitting is/has, just like how folks can omit de/het in other courses. I think we agree on this!
I reworked the course. It now accepts both is gegaan and just gegaan but only is gegaan is displayed. I kept the English entry as it is. I think it’s best to try this out first. This will perhaps mitigate the issues sufficiently. Let’s try this for a couple of weeks. Please (you or others) report back if that solves the most severe problems (or if you want to go back to another or even the old convention).
Thanks! I will give this a try and let you know what I think