# Max Havelaar, Chapter 1

Max Havelaar · Multatuli · The Novel

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-1. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-1.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/havelaar/<line id>.m4a.


Ik ben makelaar in koffi, en woon op de Lauriergracht, N° 37.  
I am a coffee broker, and I live on the Lauriergracht, No. 37.
> koffi = koffie: Period spelling of koffie ('coffee'). The repeated billboard phrase 'makelaar in koffi' becomes the comic refrain of the whole chapter, branding the narrator Droogstoppel as a man who measures the world in coffee.
> Verb-second in both halves: Each main clause keeps its finite verb in second position: 'Ik ben' and (subject dropped, understood) 'woon'. This V2 rule is the backbone of every Dutch main clause.

Het is myn gewoonte niet, romans te schryven, of zulke dingen, en het heeft dan ook lang geduurd, voor ik er toe overging een paar riem papier extra te bestellen, en het werk aantevangen, dat gy, lieve lezer, zoo-even in de hand hebt genomen, en dat ge lezen moet als ge makelaar in koffi zyt, of als ge wat anders zyt.  
It is not my habit to write novels, or things of that sort, and so it was a long while before I brought myself to order a couple of extra reams of paper and begin the work that you, dear reader, have just taken into your hands, and that you must read whether you are a coffee broker or whether you are something else.
> Present perfect with hebben: heeft ... geduurd is the voltooid tegenwoordige tijd: present of hebben plus the past participle geduurd pushed to the end. Dutch prefers this perfect where English might use a simple past.
> Relative clause sends verbs to the end: The relative pronoun dat ('that, which') opens a subordinate clause, so the finite hebt and participle genomen both move to the very end (verb-final order). gy is the literary 1860 'you'.
> Modal moet with a bare infinitive: The modal moet ('must') governs the bare infinitive lezen with no te. In this subordinate clause both verbs cluster at the end. ge is the unstressed literary form of gij.

Niet alleen dat ik nooit iets schreef wat naar een roman geleek, maar ik houd er zelfs niet van, iets dergelyks te lezen, omdat ik een man van zaken ben.  
Not only have I never written anything resembling a novel, but I do not even care to read such a thing, because I am a man of business.
> Simple past schreef (strong verb): schreef is the onvoltooid verleden tijd of schrijven, a strong verb that marks the past by changing the stem vowel (ij to ee) rather than adding -te/-de.
> Pronominal adverb split: er ... van: houden van ('to like') keeps its preposition van, but the object is expressed by er, which splits off and sits earlier in the clause: 'I don't care for it.' This er + preposition pattern replaces van + a thing.
> omdat drives the verb to the end: The subordinating conjunction omdat ('because') turns the clause verb-final, so ben lands last. Compare the coordinating want, which would keep normal word order.

Sedert jaren vraag ik my af, waartoe zulke dingen dienen, en ik sta verbaasd over de onbeschaamdheid, waarmede een dichter of romanverteller u iets op de mouw durft spelden, dat nooit gebeurd is, en meestal niet gebeuren kan.  
For years I have asked myself what such things are good for, and I stand amazed at the impudence with which a poet or a teller of novels dares to pin upon you something that never happened, and for the most part cannot happen.
> Separable verb afvragen split apart: zich afvragen ('to ask oneself, wonder') is separable: the finite vraag stands in V2, the reflexive my (= me, here 1st-person reflexive) follows, and the prefix af is flung to the end.
> Archaic interrogative waartoe: waartoe ('to what end, what for') is a pronominal adverb (waar- + toe) with a formal, literary ring; it opens an embedded question whose verb dienen goes to the end.
> Idiom: to pin on someone's sleeve: iemand iets op de mouw spelden literally 'to pin something on someone's sleeve' = to hoodwink someone, make them believe a fabrication. Droogstoppel accuses poets of exactly this.

Als ik in myn vak--ik ben makelaar in koffi, en woon op de Lauriergracht N° 37--aan een principaal --een principaal is iemand die koffi verkoopt--een opgave deed, waarin maar een klein gedeelte der onwaarheden voorkwam, die in gedichten en romans de hoofdzaak uitmaken, zou hy terstond Busselinck & Waterman nemen. Dat zyn ook makelaars in koffi, doch hun adres behoeft ge niet te weten.  
If in my line of work—I am a coffee broker, and I live on the Lauriergracht, No. 37—I were to hand a principal—a principal is someone who sells coffee—a statement in which there appeared only a small fraction of the untruths that make up the main substance of poems and novels, he would take his business to Busselinck & Waterman at once. They too are coffee brokers, but their address you need not know.
> Genitive remnant: der: der is a frozen genitive form ('of the') governing the plural onwaarheden: 'a small part of the untruths.' This inflected der survives in 1860 prose where modern Dutch would say van de.
> Conditional with zou: The apodosis of the 'if' sentence uses zou + infinitive nemen ('he would take'), the standard way to mark a hypothetical consequence. hy is the 1860 spelling of hij.

Ik pas er dus wel op, dat ik geen romans schryf, of andere valsche opgaven doe.  
So I take good care to write no novels, nor to make any other false statements.
> Separable oppassen + anticipatory er: oppassen ('to take care') is separable (pas ... op), and er anticipates the dat-clause that follows. The little dus ('so') is a coordinating link that does not disturb V2.
> geen negates an indefinite noun: Because romans ('novels') is indefinite and plural, the negation is geen, not niet: 'that I write no novels.' Inside this dat-clause the verb schryf stands last.

Ik heb dan ook altyd opgemerkt dat menschen die zich met zoo-iets inlaten, gewoonlyk slecht wegkomen.  
I have, moreover, always observed that people who meddle with that sort of thing usually come off badly.
> Perfect of separable opmerken: heb ... opgemerkt is the present perfect; the participle of separable opmerken inserts ge- between prefix and stem: op-ge-merkt. altyd = altijd ('always').
> Reflexive separable verb zich inlaten: zich inlaten met ('to get involved with, meddle in') is both reflexive (zich) and separable; in the relative clause the verb-cluster goes to the end. menschen = mensen.
> Idiom: to come off badly: er slecht (van) wegkomen means 'to come off / fare badly.' Droogstoppel's smug moral: people who dabble in fiction end up the worse for it.

Ik ben drie en veertig jaren oud, bezoek sedert twintig jaren de beurs, en kan dus voor den dag treden, als men iemand roept die ondervinding heeft.  
I am forty-three years old, I have attended the exchange for twenty years, and so I can step forward when one calls for someone with experience.
> Present tense for ongoing duration: Dutch uses the simple present bezoek with sedert ('since/for') to express an action still in progress: 'I have attended for twenty years.' English needs the perfect here.
> Case remnant den in a fixed phrase: den is the old masculine accusative article, surviving in the set expression voor den dag treden ('to step forward, come forward'). Such den forms pepper 1860 prose.

Ik heb al wat huizen zien vallen!  
I have seen many a house fall!
> Perfect with a double infinitive: Perception verb zien ('to see') plus the bare infinitive vallen ('to fall') forms a double infinitive that replaces the expected participle gezien: 'I have seen fall.' al wat huizen = 'quite a few firms/houses.'
> huis = trading house / firm: huis here means a commercial firm, and vallen ('to fall') means to go bankrupt. The pun on 'houses falling' is deliberate, setting up his theater complaint later.

En gewoonlyk, wanneer ik de oorzaken naging, kwam het me voor, dat die moesten gezocht worden in de verkeerde richting die aan de meesten gegeven was in hun jeugd.  
And usually, when I traced the causes, it seemed to me that they had to be sought in the wrong direction given to most people in their youth.
> Impersonal het + separable voorkomen: het komt me voor ('it seems to me') uses dummy het as subject and the separable voorkomen. After the fronted wanneer-clause, V2 inversion puts kwam before het.
> Passive infinitive under a modal: moesten (past of moeten) governs the passive infinitive gezocht worden ('to be sought'): a modal plus participle plus worden. die refers back to de oorzaken.
> State passive with zijn: gegeven was ('was given') is a zijn-passive expressing a resulting state, formed from the past of zijn plus a participle. The relative die again sends the verbs to the end.

Ik zeg: waarheid en gezond verstand, en hier blyf ik by. Voor de Schrift maak ik natuurlyk een uitzondering.  
I say: truth and common sense, and here I stand fast. For Scripture I make an exception, of course.
> Split pronominal adverb hier ... by: ergens bij blijven ('to stand by something') here splits: hier + the stranded preposition by (= bij). Literally 'here I stand by (it).' The fronted hier triggers V2 inversion (blyf ik).

De fout begint al van Van Alphen af, en wel terstond by den eersten regel over die "lieve wichtjes." Wat drommel kon dien ouden heer bewegen, zich uittegeven voor een aanbidder van myn zusje Truitje die zeere oogen had, of van myn broêr Gerrit die altyd met zyn neus speelde? En toch, hy zegt: "dat hy die versjes zong, door liefde gedrongen." Ik dacht dikwyls als kind: "man, ik wilde u graag eens ontmoeten, en als ge my de marmerknikkers weigerde, die ik u vragen zou, of myn naam voluit in banket--ik heet Batavus--dan houd ik u voor een leugenaar.  
The mischief begins right back with Van Alphen, and indeed in his very first line about those "dear little ones." What the deuce could move that old gentleman to give himself out as an admirer of my little sister Truitje, who had sore eyes, or of my brother Gerrit, who was forever picking his nose? And yet he says "that he sang those little verses, driven by love." As a child I often thought: man, I should dearly like to meet you once, and if you refused me the marbles I would ask of you, or my name spelled out in full in confectionery—I am called Batavus—then I should hold you for a liar.
> Case remnant dien + adjective in -en: dien ouden heer is an old masculine accusative ('that old gentleman'), with both the demonstrative dien and adjective ouden carrying the archaic -en ending. The modal kon takes the bare infinitive bewegen.
> Diminutives zusje and versjes: zusje ('little sister') and versjes ('little verses') are -je diminutives, which always become neuter and lend a small, dear, or dismissive tone. broêr is a contracted broeder ('brother').

Maar ik heb Van Alphen nooit gezien.  
But I never did set eyes on Van Alphen.
> Perfect with negative adverb nooit: The perfect heb ... gezien wraps around the time adverb nooit ('never'), which is the single negator of the clause (no double negation in Dutch).

Hy was al dood, geloof ik, toen hy ons vertelde dat myn vader myn beste vrind was--ik hield meer van Pauweltje Winser, die naast ons woonde in de Batavierstraat--en dat myn kleine hond zoo dankbaar was. We hielden geen honden, omdat ze zoo onzindelyk zyn.  
He was already dead, I believe, by the time he told us that my father was my best friend—I was fonder of Pauweltje Winser, who lived next to us on the Batavierstraat—and that my little dog was so grateful. We kept no dogs, because they are so unclean.
> toen + simple past for a single past event: toen ('when', in the past) requires the simple past vertelde and sends it to the clause end. Dutch uses toen for one-off past events, als for repeated or present/future ones.
> Comparative meer ... van: houden van takes meer ('more') to compare affection: 'I was fonder of Pauweltje.' hield is the strong past of houden. Pauweltje is a -tje diminutive of the name Pauwel.
> Causal omdat sends zijn to the end: omdat ('because') makes the clause verb-final, so the finite zyn (= zijn) closes it: 'because they are so unclean.' onzindelyk = onzindelijk.

Alles leugens! Zoo gaat dan de opvoeding voort.  
All lies! And so a child's upbringing goes on.
> Fronted zoo triggers inversion; separable voortgaan: Fronting zoo ('thus') forces V2 inversion (gaat before the subject de opvoeding), and the separable voortgaan ('to continue') drops its prefix voort to the end.

Het nieuwe zusjen is van de groenvrouw gekomen in een groote kool. Alle Hollanders zyn dapper en edelmoedig.  
The new little sister came from the greengrocer-woman in a big cabbage. All Hollanders are brave and high-minded.
> Perfect with zijn for a verb of motion: Verbs of motion/change like komen form the perfect with zijn, not hebben: is ... gekomen ('has come'). zusjen is a period spelling of zusje, the diminutive of zus.

De Romeinen waren bly dat de Batavieren hen lieten leven. De Bey van Tunis kreeg een kolyk als hy het wapperen hoorde van de nederlandsche vlag.  
The Romans were glad that the Batavians let them live. The Bey of Tunis took a colic whenever he heard the Dutch flag flapping.
> Causative laten + bare infinitive: lieten (past of laten) plus the bare infinitive leven means 'let/allowed to live.' laten as a causative/permissive auxiliary takes a bare infinitive with no te.

De hertog van Alva was een ondier.  
The Duke of Alva was a monster.

De eb, in 1672 geloof ik, duurde wat langer dan gewoonlyk, expres om Nederland te beschermen. Leugens!  
The ebb tide, in 1672 I believe, lasted somewhat longer than usual, expressly to protect the Netherlands. Lies!
> Comparative langer ... dan: langer ... dan ('longer than') is the comparative with dan for 'than.' duurde is the weak past of duren ('to last'), adding -de to the stem.
> Purpose clause om ... te: om ... te frames a purpose ('in order to protect the Netherlands'), closing with te + the infinitive beschermen. expres = 'on purpose, deliberately.'

Nederland is Nederland gebleven, omdat onze oude luî goed op hun zaken pasten, en omdat ze het ware geloof hadden. Dàt is de zaak!  
The Netherlands has remained the Netherlands because our old folk tended their affairs well, and because they held the true faith. That is the heart of it!
> Perfect of blijven with zijn: blijven ('to remain') takes zijn in the perfect: is ... gebleven. The repeated noun Nederland frames a 'has stayed itself' construction.
> Separable oppassen in a causal clause: op ... passen ('to look after, tend') is separable; in this omdat-clause it lands verb-final as pasten. luî is a period spelling of lui ('folk, people').

En dan komen later weer andere leugens. Een meisjen is een engel.  
And then later still other lies come along. A girl is an angel.
> Fronted en dan and V2: With the adverbial en dan ('and then') fronted, the finite komen jumps to second position ahead of the subject andere leugens, illustrating Dutch verb-second.
> Diminutive meisjen, neuter gender: meisjen (= meisje, 'girl') is a frozen diminutive in -je, which makes it grammatically neuter (het meisje) even though it denotes a person.

Wie dit het eerst ontdekte, heeft nooit zusters gehad. Liefde is een zaligheid.  
Whoever discovered this first never had any sisters. Love is a bliss.
> Free relative wie + verb-final: wie ('whoever') with no antecedent opens a free relative clause that goes verb-final (ontdekte). The main clause then inverts: heeft ... gehad. ontdekte is the weak past of ontdekken.

Men vlucht met het een of ander voorwerp naar het einde der aarde. De aarde heeft geen einden, en die liefde is ook gekheid.  
One flees with some object or other to the end of the earth. The earth has no ends, and that love is nonsense too.
> Genitive der aarde: der aarde is a frozen genitive ('of the earth') governing the feminine noun aarde, common in 1860 set phrases where today one says van de aarde.
> geen with an indefinite plural: Because einden ('ends') is an indefinite plural, the negation is geen rather than niet: 'the earth has no ends.'

Niemand kan zeggen dat ik niet goed leef met myn vrouw--zy is een dochter van Last & Co, makelaars in koffi--niemand kan iets op ons huwelyk aanmerken.  
No one can say that I do not live well with my wife—she is a daughter of Last & Co, coffee brokers—no one can find any fault with our marriage.
> Negative subject niemand + modal kan: niemand ('no one') is the clause's single negator; the modal kan takes the bare infinitive zeggen, and the dat-clause that follows is verb-final (leef at the end).
> Possession with van: Modern Dutch expresses 'a daughter of Last & Co' with van + noun rather than an inflected genitive, the everyday alternative to the older der/des forms. zy = zij.
> Idiom: to find fault: iets op iets aanmerken means 'to find fault with, raise an objection to' something. huwelyk = huwelijk ('marriage').

Ik ben lid van Artis, zy heeft een sjaallong van twee-en-negentig gulden, en van zulk een malle liefde die volstrekt aan het einde der aarde wil wonen, is toch tusschen ons nooit spraak geweest.  
I am a member of Artis, she has a shawl-length that cost ninety-two guilders, and of any such foolish love that absolutely insists on living at the end of the earth there has never yet been talk between us.
> Fronted PP forces inversion; perfect with zijn: The long fronted phrase 'van zulk een malle liefde ...' pushes the finite is into second position, and er is spraak geweest ('there has been talk') is a zijn-perfect. zulk een = 'such a.'
> gulden = guilder: The gulden (guilder) was the Dutch currency. Pricing his wife's shawl at ninety-two guilders is Droogstoppel's way of measuring affection in money.

Toen we getrouwd zyn, hebben wy een toertje naar den Haag gemaakt--ze heeft daar flanel gekocht, waarvan ik nog borstrokken draag--en verder heeft ons de liefde nooit de wereld ingejaagd. Dus: alles gekheid en leugens!  
When we were married we made a little excursion to The Hague—she bought flannel there, of which I still wear undervests—and beyond that, love has never chased us out into the world. So: all nonsense and lies!
> toen-clause and a perfect main clause: toen ('when', past) opens a verb-final clause (getrouwd zyn), and the main clause inverts to hebben wy ... gemaakt. Note trouwen takes zijn in the perfect of the state of being married.
> Relative pronominal adverb waarvan: waarvan ('of which, from which') is a relative waar- + van replacing van + a thing for non-persons: 'flannel of which I still wear undervests.'
> Idiom: chased out into the world: iemand de wereld injagen, 'to chase/drive someone out into the world,' here means love never drove them to dramatic flight. ingejaagd is the participle of separable injagen.

En zou myn huwelyk nu minder gelukkig wezen, dan van de menschen die zich uit liefde de tering op den hals haalden, of de haren uit het hoofd? Of denkt ge dat myn huishouden iets minder wel geregeld is, dan het wezen zou als ik voor zeventien jaar myn meisjen in verzen gezegd had dat ik haar trouwen wilde?  
And would my marriage now be any less happy than that of the people who, out of love, brought consumption upon their necks, or tore the hair from their heads? Or do you suppose my household is the least bit less well ordered than it would be had I, seventeen years ago, told my girl in verse that I wished to marry her?
> Reflexive idiom + case remnant den hals: zich iets op de hals halen ('to bring something upon oneself') is reflexive; den hals shows the old accusative den. haalden is the weak past plural.
> Pluperfect in a counterfactual: gezegd had ('had said') is the voltooid verleden tijd: past of hebben plus participle, used here for the unreal past condition ('had I told'). The pairing with wezen zou marks a counterfactual.
> tering = consumption (tuberculosis): de tering is the old word for consumption / tuberculosis, the romantic-tragic disease of lovers in sentimental fiction, which Droogstoppel scorns as self-inflicted folly.

Gekheid! Ik had dit toch even goed kunnen doen als ieder ander, want verzenmaken is een ambacht, zeker minder moeielyk dan ivoordraaien.  
Nonsense! I could have done it just as well as anyone else, for making verses is a trade, surely less difficult than turning ivory.
> Modal in a perfect: double infinitive: had ... kunnen doen ('could have done') puts the modal kunnen as a bare infinitive instead of a participle next to doen, the classic Dutch double-infinitive cluster. even goed als = 'just as well as.'
> Nominalized compound verzenmaken: verzenmaken ('verse-making') glues verzen + maken into a single noun, a right-headed Dutch compound used as the subject. ivoordraaien ('ivory-turning') is built the same way.
> Comparative minder ... dan: minder moeielyk dan ('less difficult than') is a comparative of inferiority using minder plus dan. moeielyk = moeilijk.

Hoe zouden anders de ulevellen met deviezen zoo goedkoop wezen?--Frits zegt: "Uhlefeldjes" ik weet niet, waarom?  
How else would the motto-sweets with their little verses be so cheap?—Frits says "Uhlefeldjes"; I do not know why.
> Conditional question with zouden: A rhetorical question in the conditional: zouden ... wezen ('would ... be'). The fronted hoe forces inversion of subject and verb.
> Motto-sweets: ulevellen were wrapped sweets containing a printed verse or motto (devies). Droogstoppel cites their cheapness as proof that versifying is a trivial trade. Frits's variant 'Uhlefeldjes' is a running family joke.

--En vraag eens naar den prys van een stel billardballen! Ik heb niets tegen verzen op-zichzelf.  
—And just ask the price of a set of billiard balls! I have nothing against verses in themselves.
> Imperative + den remnant: vraag is a bare-stem imperative ('ask!'), softened by eens. den prys (= prijs) keeps the old accusative article den after the preposition naar.
> Negative object niets: niets ('nothing') is the single negative element: 'I have nothing against verses in themselves.' op-zichzelf = 'in themselves, as such.'

Wil men de woorden in gelid 't zetten, goed!  
If a man wants to set the words in rank and file, well and good!
> Conditional-by-inversion + modal wil: Putting the modal wil first (with no als) creates an 'if'-meaning by inversion: 'If a man wants to set the words ...' The bare infinitive zetten ends the clause. 't = het.
> Idiom: to line up in ranks: in gelid ('in rank and file', a military image) zetten means to dress words into orderly metrical lines, Droogstoppel's contemptuous figure for writing verse.

Maar zeg niets wat niet waar is. "De lucht is guur, en 't is vier uur." Dit laat ik gelden, als het werkelijk guur en vier uur is.  
But say nothing that is not true. "The air is raw, and it is four o'clock." That I will let pass, if it really is raw and four o'clock.
> Imperative zeg + free relative wat: zeg is an imperative ('say'); niets is its negative object; the free relative wat niet waar is ('whatever is not true') is itself verb-final. Two clauses, each with its own negator.
> Conditional als, verb-final: The als-clause ('if it really is raw and four o'clock') is verb-final, ending in is. Dit laat ik gelden = 'that I will let pass,' with separable gelden.

Maar als 't kwartier voor drieën is, kan ik, die myn woorden niet in 't gelid zet, zeggen: "de lucht is guur, en 't is kwartier voor drieën." De verzenmaker is door de guurheid van den eersten regel aan een vol uur gebonden. Het moet voor hem juist een, twee uur, enz. wezen, of de lucht mag niet guur zyn.  
But if it is a quarter to three, then I, who do not set my words in rank and file, can say: "the air is raw, and it is a quarter to three." The verse-maker, on account of the rawness of his first line, is bound to a full hour. For him it must be exactly one, two o'clock, and so on, or else the air may not be raw.
> Embedded relative + V2 main clause: The main clause keeps kan in second position; an inserted relative clause die ... zet ('who do not set') is verb-final. The modal kan then governs the bare infinitive zeggen.
> State passive gebonden + den eersten regel: is ... gebonden is a zijn-passive expressing a resulting state ('is bound'). door de guurheid van den eersten regel shows the old accusative den after door.
> Modal mag with negation: mag (from mogen, 'may') plus niet expresses prohibition: 'the air may not be raw.' The bare infinitive zyn closes the clause.

Zeven en negen is verboden door de maat. Daar gaat hy dan aan 't knoeien!  
Seven and nine are forbidden by the meter. So there he goes, off to his bungling!
> State passive with door-agent: is verboden ('is forbidden') is a zijn-passive of resulting state; door de maat ('by the meter') names the agent with door.
> Fronted daar + aan 't + infinitive (progressive): Fronting daar inverts to gaat hy; aan 't knoeien ('to set to bungling') is the aan het + infinitive progressive, naming an action in progress.

Of het weêr moet veranderd, òf de tyd. Eén van beiden is dan gelogen.  
Either the weather must be altered, or the time. One of the two is then a falsehood.
> Correlative òf ... òf and an elided passive: òf ... òf ('either ... or') is correlative. moet veranderd (worden) leaves the passive infinitive worden understood: 'must be changed.' weêr = weer ('weather'), tyd = tijd.
> State passive gelogen: is ... gelogen ('is a falsehood, has been lied') uses zijn + the strong participle of liegen to state a resulting condition.

En niet alleen die verzen lokken de jeugd tot onwaarheid. Ga eens in den schouwburg, en luister dáár wat er voor leugens aan den man worden gebracht.  
And it is not only those verses that lure the young into untruth. Just go to the theater once, and listen there to the lies that are foisted on a man.
> Two imperatives, softened by eens: ga and luister are bare-stem imperatives ('go,' 'listen'), softened by eens. den schouwburg keeps the archaic accusative den.
> Process passive worden + idiom: worden gebracht is a worden-passive ('are brought/foisted'). aan den man brengen ('to palm off, sell') keeps den; the er here is the existential/quantitative little word.

De held van 't stuk wordt uit het water gehaald door iemand die op 't punt staat bankroet te maken. Dan geeft hy hem zyn halve vermogen.  
The hero of the play is pulled out of the water by someone on the very brink of bankruptcy. Then he gives him half his fortune.
> Process passive with worden: wordt ... gehaald ('is pulled out') is the worden-passive describing the action as it happens; door iemand names the agent. uit het water gehaald = 'hauled out of the water.'
> te-infinitive after op het punt staan: op het punt staan ('to be on the verge') governs a te-infinitive: bankroet te maken ('to go bankrupt'). The relative die makes the clause verb-final.

Dat kan niet waar zyn. Toen onlangs op de Prinsengracht myn hoed te-water woei--Frits zegt: waaide--heb ik den man die hem my terugbracht, een dubbeltje gegeven; en hy was tevreden.  
That cannot be true. When my hat blew into the water on the Prinsengracht the other day—Frits says: was blown—I gave the man who brought it back to me a dime; and he was content.
> toen + strong past woei: toen ('when', past) sends the verb to the end; woei is the strong past of waaien ('to blow'). Frits's correction waaide offers the modern weak form, a deliberate joke about shifting usage.
> Perfect frame around a relative clause: The perfect heb ... gegeven wraps the whole sentence; den man (old accusative den) is modified by die ... terugbracht (separable terugbrengen, verb-final).

Ik weet wel dat ik iets meer had moeten geven als hy myzelf er uit gehaald had, maar zeker myn halve vermogen niet. 't Is immers duidelyk dat men op die wys maar tweemaal in 't water hoeft te vallen om doodarm te wezen.  
I know well that I should have had to give something more had he hauled me out myself, but certainly not half my fortune. It is plain enough that at that rate a man need only fall into the water twice to be dirt-poor.
> Pluperfect counterfactual with a modal: had moeten geven ('should have had to give') is a pluperfect with a modal in double-infinitive form; the als-clause gehaald had is also pluperfect. Together they form an unreal past condition.
> hoeven te + infinitive: hoeven ('to need') takes a te-infinitive (te vallen, 'to fall'); maar ('only') limits it. men is the impersonal 'one.' op die wys = 'in that way.'
> Purpose-result clause om ... te: om ... te here gives a result/consequence ('so as to be / to end up dirt-poor'), closing with te + wezen. doodarm ('dead-poor') is an intensifying compound.

Wat het ergste is by zulke vertooningen op het tooneel, het publiek gewent zich zóó aan al die onwaarheden, dat het ze mooi vindt en toejuicht.  
What is worst about such spectacles on the stage is that the public grows so accustomed to all those untruths that it finds them fine and applauds them.
> Reflexive zich + zich gewennen aan: zich gewennen aan ('to grow accustomed to') is reflexive: zich is the 3rd-person reflexive matching the subject het publiek. The aan-phrase names what one gets used to.
> Result clause dat, verb-final: The dat-clause is verb-final: vindt and toejuicht (separable toejuichen, 'to applaud') both sit at the end. The first het is the public; ze is the untruths.

Ik had weleens lust zoo'n heel parterre in 't water te gooien, om te zien wie dat toe juichen gemeend had.  
I have sometimes had a mind to throw a whole pit of them into the water, just to see who had meant that applause in earnest.
> lust hebben + te-infinitive: lust hebben ('to have a desire') governs a te-infinitive: te gooien ('to throw'). had is the past, weleens 'now and then.'
> Purpose om ... te + free relative wie: om te zien ('in order to see') is a purpose clause; the embedded free relative wie ... gemeend had ('who had meant it') is verb-final with a pluperfect.
> parterre = the pit / stalls: The parterre was the ground-floor standing/seating area of the theater, here standing by metonymy for the whole credulous audience he would dunk.

Ik, die van waarheid houd, waarschuw ieder dat ik voor 't opvisschen van myn persoon geen zoo hoog bergloon betalen wil.  
I, who love the truth, give everyone fair warning that I will not pay so high a salvage fee for the fishing-out of my person.
> Appositive relative + V2 main verb: The relative die van waarheid houd ('who love the truth') is inserted and verb-final, while the main clause keeps waarschuw in second position.
> geen + modal wil, verb-final: geen negates the indefinite bergloon ('salvage fee'); the modal wil with bare infinitive betalen closes this dat-clause at the end.

Wie met minder niet tevreden is, mag me laten liggen.  
Whoever is not content with less may leave me lying there.
> Free relative wie + modal mag + laten: wie ('whoever') opens a verb-final free relative. The main clause uses modal mag plus causative laten plus the bare infinitive liggen: 'may leave me lying.'

Alleen Zondags zou ik iets meer geven, omdat ik dan myn kantilje ketting draag, en een anderen rok.  
Only on Sundays would I give a little more, because then I wear my filigree chain and a different coat.
> Fronted Zondags + conditional zou: The fronted adverb Zondags ('on Sundays') triggers inversion (zou ik); zou + geven is the conditional. iets meer = 'a little more.'
> Case remnant: adjective -en on a masculine object: anderen rok shows the old accusative inflection -en on the adjective before a masculine noun, a declension survival typical of 1860 prose.

Ja, dat tooneel bederft velen, meer nog dan de romans. Het is zoo aanschouwelyk!  
Yes, that stage corrupts many, more even than the novels do. It is so vivid to the eye!
> Comparative meer ... dan: meer nog dan ('even more than') compares the corrupting power of stage and novels with dan for 'than.' bederft is the present of bederven ('to spoil, corrupt').
> Impersonal het as subject: het is here a non-referential subject ('it is so vivid'), the dummy het used in evaluative statements. aanschouwelyk = aanschouwelijk ('vivid, graphic').

Met wat klatergoud en wat kant van uitgeslagen papier, ziet er dat alles zoo aanlokkelyk uit. Voor kinderen, meen ik, en voor menschen die niet in zaken zyn.  
With a bit of tinsel and a bit of cut-out paper lace, the whole thing looks so alluring. For children, I mean, and for people who are not in business.
> Fronted PP + separable eruitzien: The fronted 'met wat klatergoud ...' forces inversion (ziet ...), and the separable eruitzien ('to look, appear') scatters as ziet er ... uit. aanlokkelyk = aanlokkelijk.
> Relative die with verb-final zyn: die ('who') opens a relative clause modifying menschen (= mensen), pushing zyn (= zijn) to the end. in zaken zijn = 'to be in business.'

Zelfs als die tooneelmenschen armoede willen voorstellen, is hun voorstelling altyd leugenachtig.  
Even when those theater folk want to portray poverty, their portrayal is always a lie.
> als-clause with modal willen + bare infinitive: The als-clause is verb-final, ending in willen voorstellen (modal + bare infinitive). voorstellen is separable, but a following modal keeps the cluster intact at the end.

Een meisje wier vader bankroet maakte, werkt om de familie te onderhouden.  
A girl whose father has gone bankrupt works to support the family.
> Genitive relative wier: wier ('whose') is the feminine/plural genitive relative pronoun, agreeing with meisje as 'a girl whose father.' Its clause is verb-final (maakte at the end).
> Purpose om ... te: om ... te frames the purpose 'in order to support the family,' closing with te + the infinitive onderhouden.

Heel goed. Daar zit ze dan te naaien, te breien of te borduren.  
Very well. So there she sits, sewing, knitting, or embroidering.
> zitten te + infinitive (durative): zitten te + infinitive expresses an ongoing seated activity: 'she sits sewing, knitting or embroidering.' Each verb takes its own te. Fronted daar inverts to zit ze.

Maar tel nu eens de steken die ze doet gedurende het heele bedryf.  
But now just count the stitches she makes in the course of the whole act.
> Imperative tel + relative die: tel is a bare-stem imperative ('count'), softened by nu eens. The relative die ('that') modifies de steken and is verb-final (doet at the end).

Ze praat, ze zucht, ze loopt naar 't venster, maar werken doet ze niet.  
She talks, she sighs, she walks to the window, but work she does not.
> Fronted infinitive for emphasis + do-support: Fronting the infinitive werken puts emphasis on it and forces inversion with the prop verb doet: literally 'but work she does not.' This werken doet ze niet is an emphatic Dutch pattern.

De familie die van dezen arbeid leven kan, heeft weinig noodig.  
The family that can live on this labor has need of little.
> Relative die + demonstrative dezen + modal kan: die opens a relative clause; dezen arbeid shows the old masculine dative/accusative inflection of deze; the modal kan with bare infinitive leven goes to the end.

Zoo'n meisjen is natuurlyk de heldin.  
Such a girl is, of course, the heroine.
> zo'n + diminutive meisjen: Zoo'n (= zo'n, 'such a') with the diminutive meisjen ('little girl'). The -je diminutive makes the noun neuter, though here paired with feminine heldin ('heroine').

Ze heeft eenige verleiders de trappen afgeworpen, ze roept gedurig: "o myne moeder, o, myne moeder!" en stelt dus de deugd voor.  
She has thrown a few seducers down the stairs, she keeps crying "oh, my mother, oh, my mother!" and so she stands for virtue.
> Perfect of separable afwerpen: heeft ... afgeworpen ('has thrown down') is the perfect of separable afwerpen; the participle inserts ge- as af-ge-worpen. de trappen = 'the stairs.'
> Separable voorstellen split apart: voorstellen ('to represent') is separable: the finite stelt stays in V2 and the prefix voor flies to the very end. dus ('so') links the clauses without disturbing order.

Wat is dat voor een deugd, die een vol jaar noodig heeft voor een paar wollen kousen?  
What sort of virtue is that, which needs a whole year for a pair of woolen stockings?
> Relative die, verb-final: die refers to deugd (a de-word, so die not dat) and opens a verb-final relative clause ending in heeft. noodig hebben = 'to need.'

Geeft dit alles niet valsche denkbeelden van deugd, en "werken voor den kost?" Alles gekheid en leugens!  
Does all this not give false notions of virtue, and of "working for one's bread?" All nonsense and lies!
> Yes/no question by inversion: A yes/no question fronts the finite verb Geeft before the subject dit alles. niet here seeks agreement ('does this not give ...?').
> Case remnant den kost: den kost ('one's bread/keep') preserves the old accusative den in this set phrase voor den kost werken, 'to work for a living.'

Dan komt haar eerste minnaar--die vroeger klerk was aan 't kopieboek, maar nu schatryk--op-eens terug, en trouwt haar.  
Then her first sweetheart—who was formerly a clerk at the copybook, but is now immensely rich—comes back all of a sudden, and marries her.
> Separable terugkomen + fronted Dan: terugkomen ('to come back') is separable: fronted Dan inverts to komt, and the prefix terug lands at the end after a long parenthetical insertion. trouwt haar = 'marries her.'

Ook weer leugens.  
Lies again, too.

Wie geld heeft, trouwt geen meisjen uit een gefailleerd huis.  
A man with money does not marry a girl from a bankrupt house.
> Free relative wie + geen: wie geld heeft ('whoever has money') is a verb-final free relative; the main clause negates the indefinite meisjen with geen ('marries no girl').
> gefailleerd = bankrupt: gefailleerd ('failed, bankrupt') is from the commercial verb failleren; huis again means a firm/family business. The whole sentence is Droogstoppel's mercenary creed.

En als ge meent, dat dit op het tooneel er dóór kan als uitzondering, blyft toch myn aanmerking bestaan, dat men den zin voor waarheid bederft by het volk, dat de uitzondering als regel aanneemt, en dat men de publieke zedelykheid ondermynt, door het te gewennen iets toetejuichen op het tooneel, wat door elk fatsoenlyk makelaar of koopman voor een bespottelyke krankzinnigheid wordt gehouden in de wereld. Toen ik trouwde, waren wy op 't kantoor van myn schoonvader--Last & Co--met ons dertienen, en er ging wat om!  
And if you think that on the stage this may pass as an exception, my objection still stands: that one corrupts the people's sense of truth by letting them accept the exception as the rule, and that one undermines public morality by accustoming them to applaud something on the stage which, out in the world, every respectable broker or merchant holds to be a ridiculous lunacy. When I married, we were thirteen of us in my father-in-law's office—Last & Co—and a good deal of business was going on!
> Impersonal men + verb-final dat-clauses: A chain of dat-clauses, each with impersonal men ('one') as subject and the verb at the end (bederft, ondermynt). den zin keeps the old accusative den.
> door + te-infinitive (means): door + te-infinitive expresses the means: 'by accustoming them to applaud.' The embedded toetejuichen writes the te inside separable toejuichen, the 1860 habit.
> Process passive houden voor: wordt gehouden voor ('is held to be') is a worden-passive of the idiom iets voor iets houden. The relative wat ('which') opens the clause, sending wordt gehouden to the end.

En nog meer leugens op het tooneel. Als de held met zyn styven komediestap weggaat om 't verdrukte vaderland te redden, waarom gaat dan de dubbele achterdeur altyd vanzelf open?  
And still more lies on the stage. When the hero strides off with his stiff theatrical gait to save the oppressed fatherland, why does the double back door always open of itself?
> als-clause (separable weggaan) + purpose om ... te: The als-clause is verb-final with separable weggaat; it nests a purpose clause om ... te redden ('in order to save'). styven shows the old accusative adjective ending.
> Question inversion + separable opengaan: A wh-question fronts waarom and inverts (gaat ...); the separable opengaan scatters its prefix open to the end. vanzelf = 'of its own accord.'

En verder, hoe kan de persoon die in verzen spreekt, voorzien wat de ander te antwoorden heeft, om hem 't rym gemakkelyk te maken? Als de veldheer tot de prinses Zegt: "mevrouw, het is te laat, de poorten zyn gesloten" hoe kan hy dan vooruit weten, dat zy zeggen wil: "welaan dan, onversaagd, men doe het zwaard ontblooten?" Want als zy nu eens, hoorende dat de poort toe was, antwoordde dat ze dan wat wachten zou tot er geopend werd, of dat zy een andermaal eens terug zou komen, waar bleef dan maat en rym?  
And further, how can the character who speaks in verse foresee what the other has to answer, so as to make the rhyme easy for him? When the general says to the princess "madam, it is too late, the gates are closed," how can he know in advance that she will want to say "then up, undaunted; let the sword be drawn?" For if she now, hearing that the gate was shut, were to answer that she would wait a while until it was opened, or that she would come back some other time, where then would meter and rhyme be?
> State passive zijn + gesloten: zyn gesloten ('are closed') is a zijn-passive of resulting state, contrasting with the worden-passive of an action in progress. zyn = zijn.
> Subjunctive/archaic men doe + causative: men doe ('let one ...') is an old optative-subjunctive form of doen, here as a causative with ontblooten ('to bare the sword'). It belongs squarely to solemn 1860 verse register.
> Present participle hoorende: hoorende (= horend, 'hearing') is a present participle in -end(e) used adverbially: 'on hearing that the gate was shut.' The trailing -e is the literary 1860 form.

Is het dus niet een pure leugen, als de veldheer de prinses vragend aanziet, om te weten wat ze doen wil na 't poortsluiten? Nog-eens: als 't mensch nu eens lust had gehad te gaan slapen, in plaats van iets te ontblooten?  
Is it not, then, a pure lie when the general looks questioningly at the princess to learn what she means to do once the gate is shut? Once more: what if the creature had now taken a fancy to go to sleep, instead of drawing anything?
> Impersonal het in a yes/no question: het here is the dummy subject of an evaluative question ('Is it not, then, a pure lie ...?'). The verb Is fronts for the yes/no question.
> Purpose om ... te + embedded modal: om te weten ('in order to know') is a purpose clause; the embedded indirect question wat ze doen wil is verb-final with modal wil and bare infinitive doen.
> Pluperfect counterfactual + te-infinitive: lust had gehad ('had had a desire') is a pluperfect; te gaan slapen ('to go to sleep') is its te-infinitive. The whole als-clause sets up an unreal past. 't mensch ('the creature') is neuter and faintly contemptuous.

Alles leugens! En dan die beloonde deugd!  
All lies! And then that rewarded virtue!

O, o, o! Ik ben sedert zeventien jaren makelaar in koffi--Lauriergracht, N° 37--en heb dus al zoo-iets bygewoond, maar het stuit my altyd vreeselyk, als ik de goede lieve waarheid zóó zie verdraaien.  
Oh, oh, oh! I have been a coffee broker for seventeen years—Lauriergracht, No. 37—and so I have already witnessed something of this sort, but it always shocks me dreadfully to see the good, dear truth so distorted.
> Present for duration + perfect of separable bijwonen: ben ... sedert ... uses the present for ongoing duration ('have been for seventeen years'); heb ... bygewoond is the perfect of separable bijwonen ('to witness'), participle bij-ge-woond.
> Perception verb zien + bare infinitive: zie verdraaien ('see distorted') is the perception verb zien plus a bare infinitive. The als-clause is verb-final; het stuit my = 'it shocks me.'

Beloonde deugd? Is 't niet om van de deugd een handelsartikel te maken?  
Rewarded virtue? Is it not as good as making a trade article of virtue?
> om ... te in a rhetorical question: om ... te maken ('to make ... of') frames the consequence in a rhetorical question: 'is it not as good as making a trade article of virtue?' 't = het.
> Compound: handelsartikel: handelsartikel ('trade article, commodity') glues handel + s + artikel. The linking -s is a common joint in Dutch noun compounds. Droogstoppel reduces virtue to merchandise.

Het is zoo niet in de wereld, en 't is goed dat het niet zoo is. Want waar bleef de verdienste, als de deugd beloond werd?  
It is not so in the world, and it is well that it is not so. For where would the merit be, if virtue were rewarded?
> Process passive worden in the past + want: beloond werd ('were rewarded') is a worden-passive in the simple past inside an als-clause. want ('for') is a coordinating conjunction and does not send its verb to the end.

Waartoe dus die infame leugens altyd voorgewend?  
Why, then, are these infamous lies forever held up before us?
> Archaic waartoe + elided passive: waartoe ('to what end') is a formal interrogative. The verbless voorgewend (worden) leaves the passive auxiliary understood: 'why are these lies forever held up?' voorwenden = to feign/pretend.

Daar is by-voorbeeld Lukas, onze pakhuisknecht, die reeds by den vader van Last & Co heeft gewerkt--de firma was toen Last & Meyer, maar de Meyers zyn er lang uit--dàt was dan toch wel een deugdzaam man.  
Take, for instance, Lukas, our warehouse hand, who worked even for the father of Last & Co—the firm was then Last & Meyer, but the Meyers have long been out of it—now that was indeed a virtuous man.
> Relative die + perfect, verb-final: The relative die opens a clause whose perfect heeft gewerkt goes to the end. den vader keeps the old accusative den after by (= bij).
> Existential/locative er + uit: er ... uit zijn ('to be out of it') uses the versatile er with the locative uit: the Meyers are 'long out' of the firm.

Geen boon kwam er ooit te-kort, hy ging stipt naar de kerk, en drinken deed hy niet.  
Not a single bean ever came up short, he went punctually to church, and drink he did not.
> geen as subject + existential er: Geen boon ('not a single bean') is the negative indefinite subject; er supports the existential reading, and te-kort komen ('to fall short') uses separable tekortkomen. kwam is the strong past of komen.
> Fronted infinitive + do-support + niet: Fronting drinken for emphasis forces the prop verb deed and inversion: 'and drink he did not.' Same emphatic pattern as werken doet ze niet earlier.

Als myn schoonvader te Driebergen was, bewaarde hy het huis, en de kas, en alles.  
When my father-in-law was at Driebergen, he kept watch over the house, and the cash box, and everything.
> als (repeated/habitual) + simple past: Here als signals a recurring past situation ('whenever ...'), and the verbs are simple past (was ... bewaarde). The fronted als-clause inverts the main clause to bewaarde hy.

Eens heeft hy aan de Bank zeventien gulden te veel ontvangen, en, hy bracht ze terug.  
Once he received seventeen guilders too much from the Bank, and he brought it back.
> Perfect then simple past; separable terugbrengen: heeft ... ontvangen is the perfect; bracht ... terug is the simple past of separable terugbrengen, prefix terug at the end. Fronted Eens ('once') inverts to heeft hy.

Hy is nu oud en jichtig, en kan niet meer dienen. Nu heeft hy niets, want er gaat veel by ons om, en we hebben jong volk noodig.  
He is old now and gouty, and can serve no longer. Now he has nothing, for a great deal of business passes through our hands, and we need young people.
> Separable omgaan with existential er: omgaan ('to go on, happen') is separable; er ... om frames the existential 'a lot goes on with us.' by ons = 'at our firm.' This phrase recurs as Droogstoppel's boast of busyness.
> nodig hebben = to need: nodig hebben ('to need', here noodig) is a fixed verb-plus-adjective expression; jong volk ('young people, young staff') is its object.

Welnu, ik houd dien Lukas voor zeer deugdzaam, maar wordt hy nu beloond?  
Well then, I hold that Lukas to be most virtuous, but is he now rewarded?
> iemand voor iets houden + dien: iets/iemand voor iets houden ('to consider someone to be') is the idiom behind houd ... voor. dien Lukas shows the old accusative dien of die.
> Process passive worden as a question: wordt ... beloond ('is rewarded') is a worden-passive; the yes/no question fronts wordt before the subject hy. The rhetorical answer comes in the next segments.

Komt er een prins die hem diamanten geeft, of een fee die hem boterhammen smeert?  
Does a prince come along to give him diamonds, or a fairy to butter his bread?
> Existential er-question + relative die: Komt er een prins ('does a prince come') is an existential question with er and inversion; the relative die ... geeft is verb-final.
> boterhammen smeren: boterhammen smeren means 'to butter slices of bread.' The bathos of a fairy buttering an old man's sandwiches mocks the theater's tidy poetic-justice endings.

Waarachtig niet!  
Truly not!

Hy is arm, en blyft arm, en dit moet ook zoo wezen.  
He is poor, and remains poor, and so it ought to be.
> Modal moet + bare infinitive wezen: moet ... wezen ('must be') is a modal plus the older bare infinitive wezen (= zijn). The three coordinated clauses each keep V2 order.

Ik kan hem niet helpen--want we hebben jong volk noodig, omdat er zooveel by ons omgaat--maar al kon ik, waar bleef zyn verdienste, als hy nu op zyn ouden dag een gemakkelyk leven leiden kon?  
I cannot help him—for we need young people, since so much business passes through our hands—but even if I could, where would his merit be, if he could now, in his old age, lead a comfortable life?
> Causal omdat + separable omgaan + er: omdat sends the verb to the end; separable omgaan reunites as omgaat there, with er for the existential reading. zooveel = zoveel.
> Concessive al + conditional als: al kon ik ('even if I could') is a concessive with inversion; the als-clause uses modal kon plus bare infinitive leiden, verb-final. The whole is a layered counterfactual.

Dan zouden alle pakhuisknechts wel deugdzaam worden, en iedereen, hetgeen Gods bedoeling niet wezen kan, omdat er dan geen byzondere belooning voor de braven overbleef hier-namaals.  
Then all warehouse hands would turn virtuous, and everyone besides—which cannot be God's intention, since there would then be no special reward left for the upright in the hereafter.
> Conditional zouden + worden (become): zouden ... worden ('would become') is the conditional; here worden is the full verb 'to become,' not a passive auxiliary. Fronted Dan inverts to zouden.
> geen + separable overblijven, verb-final: omdat sends the verb to the end (overbleef, separable overblijven); geen negates the indefinite belooning. hier-namaals = 'in the hereafter.'

Maar op een tooneel verdraaien ze dat ... alles leugens!  
But on a stage they twist it all around ... all lies!
> Fronted PP + V2 inversion: The fronted prepositional phrase op een tooneel ('on a stage') pushes the finite verb verdraaien into second place ahead of the subject ze, a clean illustration of verb-second.

Ik ben ook deugdzaam, maar vraag ik hiervoor belooning?  
I too am virtuous, but do I ask any reward for it?
> Question inversion + pronominal adverb hiervoor: A yes/no question fronts vraag before ik. hiervoor ('for this') is a pronominal adverb (hier- + voor) replacing voor + a thing.

Als myn zaken goed gaan--en dit doen ze--als myn vrouw en kinderen gezond zyn, zoodat ik geen gemaal heb met dokter en apteker ... als ik jaar-in jaar-uit een sommetje kan ter-zy leggen voor den ouden dag ... als Frits knap opgroeit, om later in myn plaats te komen als ik naar Driebergen ga ... zie, dan ben ik heel tevreden. Maar dit alles is een natuurlyk gevolg van de omstandigheden, en omdat ik op de zaken pas.  
When my affairs go well—and they do—when my wife and children are healthy, so that I have no bother with the doctor and the apothecary ... when year in, year out, I can lay a little sum by for my old age ... when Frits grows up clever, to take my place in time when I go to Driebergen ... why then, I am quite content. But all this is a natural consequence of circumstances, and of my tending to business.
> Stacked als-clauses resolving in dan + inversion: A series of als-clauses (all verb-final: gaan, zyn, leggen, opgroeit) builds suspense; the resolving main clause inverts after dan to ben ik. This is the canonical Dutch 'if ..., then ...' rhythm.
> Purpose om ... te: om ... te komen ('in order to take my place later') is a purpose clause closing with te + komen. in myn plaats = 'in my stead.'

Voor myn deugd eisch ik niets. En dat ik toch deugdzaam bèn, blykt uit myn liefde voor de waarheid.  
For my virtue I ask nothing. And that I am nevertheless virtuous is shown by my love of the truth.
> Fronted dat-clause as subject + blijken uit: The whole dat-clause ('that I am nevertheless virtuous') is the fronted subject, with bèn at its end; the main verb blykt (blijken uit, 'to be shown by'; uit is a preposition governing the complement, not a separable prefix) then follows. The grave accent on bèn marks stress.

Deze is, na myn gehechtheid aan het geloof, myn hoofdneiging. En ik wenschte dat ge hiervan overtuigd waart, lezer, omdat het de verontschuldiging is voor 't schryven van dit boek.  
This love is, after my attachment to the faith, my chief inclination. And I should wish you to be convinced of it, reader, because it is the excuse for the writing of this book.
> Past subjunctive waart for a wish: waart is the old 2nd-person past subjunctive of zijn ('were'), used after a wish: 'I should wish you were convinced of this.' ge ... hiervan overtuigd is a state-passive idea with the pronominal hiervan.
> Nominalized infinitive 't schryven: 't schryven (= het schrijven, 'the writing') is an infinitive used as a neuter noun with the article het, the standard Dutch way to nominalize an action.

Een tweede neiging, die my even sterk als waarheidsliefde beheerscht, is de hartstocht voor myn vak.  
A second inclination, which rules me just as strongly as my love of truth, is the passion for my profession.
> Relative die + comparison even ... als: die opens a relative clause (verb-final beheerscht); even sterk ... als ('just as strongly as') is the equative comparison. beheerscht = beheerst ('rules, governs').

Ik ben namelyk makelaar in koffi, Lauriergracht N° 37.  
I am, namely, a coffee broker, Lauriergracht No. 37.
> namelyk = namely / that is: namelyk (= namelijk) introduces an explanation, 'namely, you see.' Here it underscores the comic compulsion with which Droogstoppel re-announces his trade and address yet again.

Welnu, lezer, aan myn onkreukbare liefde voor de waarheid, en aan myn yver voor de zaken, hebt gy te danken dat deze bladen geschreven zyn. Ik zal u vertellen hoe dit is toegegaan.  
Well then, reader, it is to my incorruptible love of the truth, and to my zeal for business, that you owe the writing of these pages. I will tell you how it came about.
> Fronted PP + hebben te danken + state passive: The fronted aan-phrase inverts to hebt gy; iets aan iets te danken hebben ('to owe something to') uses te + danken. The dat-clause ends in the zijn-passive geschreven zyn ('are written').
> Future with zullen + perfect toegaan: zal ... vertellen ('will tell') is the explicit future with zullen. The embedded hoe dit is toegegaan ('how this came about') is a verb-final perfect of separable toegaan.

Daar ik nu voor 't oogenblik afscheid van u neem--ik moet naar de beurs--noodig ik u straks op een tweede hoofdstuk. Tot weerziens dus!  
Since for the moment I now take my leave of you—I must go to the exchange—I invite you presently to a second chapter. Until we meet again, then!
> Causal Daar + separable afscheid nemen: Daar here is the literary causal conjunction 'since/because,' sending the verb to the end (neem). afscheid nemen van ('to take leave of') is a fixed separable-like phrase.
> V2 inversion after a fronted clause + separable uitnodigen: After the long fronted Daar-clause, the main clause inverts: noodig ik ('I invite'). uitnodigen is separable, though here the prefix is absorbed in the period spelling.

Eilieve, steek het by u ...'t is een kleine moeite ... het kan te-pas komen ... ei zie, daar is het: een adreskaartje! Die Co ben ik, sedert de Meyers er uit zyn ... de oude Last is myn schoonvader.  
Pray, slip it into your pocket ... it is a small trouble ... it may come in handy ... why look, here it is: a visiting card! That Co is I, ever since the Meyers went out of it ... old Last is my father-in-law.
> Imperative steek + archaic interjection Eilieve: steek is a bare-stem imperative ('slip/put'); Eilieve ('pray, prithee') is an old polite interjection. by u = 'on your person.'
> Fronted Die Co + V2; sedert-clause with er uit: Fronting Die Co ('that Co') inverts to ben ik. The sedert-clause ('ever since the Meyers are out of it') uses er ... uit and is verb-final.
> Diminutive compound adreskaartje: adreskaartje ('little visiting/calling card') joins adres + kaart + the diminutive -je. The diminutive both miniaturizes and adds a coaxing, ingratiating tone as he presses his card on the reader.

______________________________ | | | LAST & Co | | | | MAKELAARS IN KOFFI | | | | Lauriergracht, N° 37 | |______________________________| TWEEDE HOOFDSTUK  
______________________________ | | | LAST & Co | | | | COFFEE BROKERS | | | | Lauriergracht, No. 37 | |______________________________| SECOND CHAPTER

Het was slap op de beurs, maar de voorjaarsveiling zal 't wel goed maken.  
Trade was slack on the exchange, but the spring auction will surely set it right.
> Future with zullen + separable goedmaken: zal ... maken ('will set right') is the zullen-future; wel adds reassuring confidence. voorjaarsveiling ('spring auction') is a noun compound voorjaar + s + veiling.

Denk niet dat er niets by ons omgaat. By Busselinck & Waterman is 't nog slapper.  
Do not imagine that nothing passes through our hands. At Busselinck & Waterman's it is slacker still.
> Negative imperative + existential er ... omgaat: Denk niet ('do not imagine') is a negated imperative; the dat-clause has existential er with niets and separable omgaat at the end. by ons = 'at our firm.'
> Comparative slapper + fronted PP: nog slapper ('slacker still') is the comparative of slap; the fronted By-phrase inverts to is 't. Droogstoppel can never resist a dig at his rivals.

Een vreemde wereld! Men woont zoo iets by, als men zoo'n twintig jaren de beurs bezoekt.  
A strange world! One witnesses such things when one has attended the exchange for some twenty years.
> Impersonal men + separable bijwonen: men ('one') is the impersonal subject in both clauses; separable bijwonen ('to witness') splits as woont ... by. The als-clause is verb-final (bezoekt).

Verbeeld u dat ze daar getracht hebben--Busselinck & Waterman, meen ik--my Ludwig Stern aftenemen.  
Imagine—they actually tried there—Busselinck & Waterman, I mean—to take Ludwig Stern away from me.
> Reflexive imperative + perfect + separable afnemen: Verbeeld u ('imagine,' reflexive imperative with u) opens it; the dat-clause has the perfect getracht hebben and the te-infinitive aftenemen (1860 spelling of af te nemen, separable afnemen 'to take away').
---

Source text: public domain (Multatuli / Eduard Douwes Dekker, d. 1887; Dutch 1860, Project Gutenberg #11024). English translation: original, © 1732 Studios (2026); rendered freshly from the public-domain Dutch, not derived from any prior English translation. Sentence-aligned by 1732 Studios.