# Max Havelaar, Chapter 10

Max Havelaar · Multatuli · The Novel

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-10. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-10.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/havelaar/<line id>.m4a.


TIENDE HOOFDSTUK Hoewel ik, waar 't principes geldt, niemand ontzie, heb ik toch begrepen dat ik met Stern een anderen weg moet inslaan dan met Frits, en daar het te voorzien is dat myn naam--de firma is Last & Co, maar ik heet Droogstoppel: Batavus Droogstoppel--in aanraking komen zal met een boek waarin zaken voorkomen, die niet strooken met den eerbied dien elk fatsoenlyk man en makelaar zichzelf verschuldigd is, acht ik het myn plicht u meetedeelen, hoe ik getracht heb ook dien Stern terugtebrengen op den waren weg.  
TENTH CHAPTER. Although, where principles are at stake, I spare no one, I have nonetheless understood that I must take a different road with Stern than with Frits; and since it is to be foreseen that my name — the firm is Last & Co, but I am called Droogstoppel: Batavus Droogstoppel — will come into contact with a book containing matters that do not square with the respect every decent man and broker owes himself, I consider it my duty to inform you how I have tried to bring this Stern, too, back onto the true path.
> Concessive Hoewel + main-clause inversion: 'Hoewel' (although) is subordinating, verb-final ('ontzie'). With this clause first, the main clause inverts: 'heb ik toch begrepen'. 'niemand ontzien' = to spare no one.
> Causal daar + delayed inversion: An enormous 'daar'-clause ('since it is to be foreseen that...') fills first position, so the main clause inverts: 'acht ik het myn plicht'. 'meetedeelen' (mee-te-deelen) is the te-infinitive of separable meedelen.

Ik heb hem niet van den Heer gesproken--omdat hy Luthersch is--maar ik heb gewerkt op zyn gemoed en zyn eer.  
I did not speak to him of the Lord — because he is Lutheran — but I worked upon his conscience and his sense of honor.
> omdat-clause, verb-final: 'omdat' (because) is subordinating, sending 'is' to the end. 'Luthersch' (Lutheran, period spelling with -sch) explains why Droogstoppel won't preach the Reformed 'Heer' to Stern.
> werken op het gemoed: 'op iemands gemoed werken' = to work on someone's feelings/conscience. 'gemoed' = mind, heart, conscience; 'eer' = honour. Droogstoppel's manipulative tactic stated plainly.

Ziehier hoe ik dit heb aangelegd, en merk daarby op, hoever men het brengt met menschkunde.  
See here how I went about it, and note in passing how far one can get with a knowledge of human nature.
> Imperative of separable opmerken + indirect question: 'merk ... op' is the imperative of separable 'opmerken' (to note). 'hoever men het brengt' is an embedded question, verb-final. 'het ver brengen met' = to get far with.
> menschkunde — knowledge of human nature: A compound: 'mensch' (human) + 'kunde' (knowledge/science) = knowledge of human nature, shrewdness about people. Droogstoppel prides himself on it while displaying none.

Ik had hem hooren zeggen: auf Ehrenwort, en vroeg wat hy daarmee bedoelde?  
I had heard him say: auf Ehrenwort, and asked what he meant by it.
> Perception verb hooren + bare infinitive; pronominal daarmee: 'had hem hooren zeggen' uses perception verb 'hooren' (hear) with a bare infinitive 'zeggen' — and an infinitivus pro participio (hooren, not gehoord) in the pluperfect. 'daarmee' (with it/that) is a pronominal adverb.

--Wèl, zeide hy, dat ik myn eer verpand voor de waarheid van wat ik zeg.  
"Why," said he, "that I pledge my honor for the truth of what I say."
> dat-clause + headless relative wat: 'dat ik ... verpand' is verb-final after 'dat'. 'wat ik zeg' is a headless relative ('what I say') after the preposition object 'van'. 'zyn eer verpanden' = to pledge one's honour.

--Dat is zeer veel, hernam ik.  
"That is a great deal," I returned.
> Inquit inversion: hernam ik: 'hernam ik' = 'I returned/rejoined', an inquit with subject after the verb. 'hernemen' (to take up again, here 'to reply') is a literary speech verb in the imperfect.

Ben je zoo overtuigd, altyd de waarheid te zeggen?  
"Are you so certain of always telling the truth?"
> Adjective + te-infinitive: 'overtuigd ... te zeggen' = 'certain to say': the adjective 'overtuigd' governs a te-infinitive. Verb-first order marks the yes/no question. 'altyd de waarheid zeggen' = always to tell the truth.

--Ja, verklaarde hy, de waarheid zeg ik altyd.  
"Yes," he declared, "the truth is what I always tell."
> Fronted object for emphasis: Fronting the object 'de waarheid' (the truth) to first position throws the subject after the verb: 'zeg ik'. This topicalization stresses 'the truth' — verb-second order with a non-subject in front.

Als de borst me gloeit ... De lezer weet de rest.  
When my breast glows ... The reader knows the rest.

--Dat is waarlyk zeer schoon, zei ik, en ik hield me heel onnoozel alsof ik het geloofde. Maar hierin lag juist de fynheid van den strik, dien ik hem spande met het doel om, zonder gevaar te loopen den ouden Stern in handen van Busselinck & Waterman te zien vallen, toch dat jonge kereltjen eens goed op zyn plaats te zetten, en hem te doen gevoelen hoe groot de afstand is tusschen iemand die pas begint--al doet dan ook zyn vader groote zaken--en een makelaar die twintig jaar de beurs bezocht heeft.  
"That is truly very fine," I said, and I played the perfect simpleton, as if I believed it. But in this lay precisely the subtlety of the snare I set for him — my aim being, without running the risk of seeing old Stern fall into the hands of Busselinck & Waterman, to put that young fellow firmly in his place after all, and to make him feel how great the distance is between a man just starting out — even if his father does do large business — and a broker who has frequented the exchange for twenty years.
> Reflexive zich houden + alsof irrealis: 'zich onnoozel houden' = to play the innocent/simpleton; reflexive 'me'. 'alsof ik het geloofde' (as if I believed it) uses an irrealis past, verb-final.
> Old accusative dien + om ... te: 'dien' is the old masculine accusative of the relative 'die', agreeing with 'den strik' (the snare). 'met het doel om ... op zyn plaats te zetten' = with the aim of putting him in his place (om ... te purpose).
> The Exchange refrain returns: Droogstoppel's perennial boast — twenty years on the Amsterdam Exchange — recurs as his measure of all worth. He wields it to humiliate young Stern, 'a man just starting out'.

Het was me namelyk bekend dat hy allerlei tuig van verzen uit het hoofd wist--hy zegt: "uitwendig"--en daar verzen altyd leugens bevatten, was ik zeker dat ik hem zeer spoedig zou betrappen op onwaarheid.  
For it was known to me that he had all manner of trashy verses by heart — he says: "by rote" — and since verses always contain lies, I was certain that I would very soon catch him out in an untruth.
> Impersonal het + dat-clause: 'Het was me bekend dat...' uses dummy 'het' as a placeholder subject ('it was known to me that...'). The dat-clause is verb-final ('wist'). 'uit het hoofd weten/kennen' = to know by heart.
> Causal daar + inversion: Fronted causal 'daar'-clause ('since verses always contain lies', verb-final 'bevatten') forces the main clause to invert: 'was ik zeker'. 'betrappen op onwaarheid' = to catch out in a falsehood.
> tuig; uit het hoofd vs. uitwendig: 'tuig' = trash, riff-raff (here 'trashy verses'). The joke: Stern, the German, mangles the idiom 'uit het hoofd' (by heart) into 'uitwendig' (which actually means 'outwardly/externally') — a non-native's slip Droogstoppel notes with contempt.

Dit duurde dan ook niet lang.  
Nor did this take long.

Ik zat in de zykamer, en hy was in de suite ... want we hebben een suite. Marie was aan 't breien, en hy zou haar wat vertellen.  
I was sitting in the side room, and he was in the parlor ... for we have a parlor. Marie was knitting, and he was going to tell her something.
> Progressive aan het + breien; conditional zou: 'aan 't breien' = 'aan het breien', the progressive ('was knitting'). 'zou ... vertellen' is the conditional/future-in-the-past ('was going to tell'). 'breien' = to knit.
> zijkamer and suite: 'zykamer' (zijkamer) = the side room; 'de suite' = the connected front-and-back parlor of a Dutch town house, opened by sliding doors. 'want we hebben een suite' is Droogstoppel preening over his respectable home.

Ik luisterde aandachtig toe, en toen 't uit was, vroeg ik hem of hy 't boek bezat, waarin het ding stond, dat hy daar zoo-even had opgedeund.  
I listened attentively, and when it was over I asked him whether he had the book in which the thing stood that he had just reeled off there.
> Indirect question of + relative waarin: 'of hy ... bezat' is an indirect yes/no question, verb-final. 'waarin het ding stond' is a relative clause with the pronominal-adverb relative 'waarin' (in which). 'opdeunen' = to reel/rattle off.

Hy zei ja, en bracht het my. Het was een deeltje der werken van zekeren Heine.  
He said yes, and brought it to me. It was a volume of the works of a certain Heine.
> Diminutive deeltje + genitive der: 'deeltje' is the diminutive of 'deel' (volume/part) — a slim volume. 'der werken' is the plural genitive 'der' ('of the works'). 'zekeren Heine' keeps the old accusative/oblique -n on 'zeker' (a certain).

Den volgenden morgen gaf ik hem--aan Stern, meen ik--de onderstaande:  
The next morning I handed him — to Stern, I mean — the following:
> Fronted time phrase + accusative -n: 'Den volgenden morgen' (the next morning) fronts and inverts: 'gaf ik'. The phrase is a fossilized accusative-of-time: 'den volgenden' both carry the old masculine accusative -n.

Beschouwingen omtrent de waarheidsliefde van iemand die het volgend prul van Heine vóórzegt aan een jong meisje dat in de suite zit te breien.  
Reflections on the love of truth in someone who recites the following trash by Heine to a young girl sitting and knitting in the parlor.
> Stacked relatives die / dat + zitten te: Two relative clauses nest: 'die ... vóórzegt' (de-word iemand) and 'dat ... zit te breien' (het-word meisje, so 'dat'). 'zit te breien' is the 'zitten te + infinitive' progressive. 'vóórzeggen' = to recite/prompt.
> prul, Beschouwingen, waarheidsliefde: 'prul' = trash, a worthless trifle; 'Beschouwingen' = Reflections/Considerations (a mock-scholarly title); 'waarheidsliefde' = love of truth. Droogstoppel solemnly titles his philistine attack on a love poem.

Auf Flügeln des Gesanges, Herzliebchen, trag ich dich fort,  
On wings of song, sweetheart, I carry you away,

Herzliebchen?  
Herzliebchen?

Marie, jouw Herzliebchen?  
Marie, your Herzliebchen?

Weten je ouweluî daarvan, en Louise Rosemeyer?  
Do your old folks know of this, and Louise Rosemeyer?
> ouwelui — old folks: 'ouweluî' (modern ouwelui / ouwelui) = colloquial for 'old folks, parents'. The familiar, faintly mocking register fits Droogstoppel needling Marie about her German admirer.

Is het braaf, dit te zeggen aan een kind, dat door zoo-iets al zeer ligt ongehoorzaam zou worden aan hare moeder, door zich in het hoofd te halen dat ze mondig is, omdat men haar: Herzliebchen noemt?  
Is it proper to say such a thing to a child who, by something of the sort, might very easily grow disobedient to her mother — by getting it into her head that she is of age, because she is called: Herzliebchen?
> Relative dat + conditional zou worden + reflexive: 'dat ... zou worden' is a relative clause with the conditional (zou + worden). 'door zich ... in het hoofd te halen' = 'by getting it into her head' (means via door + te-infinitive, with reflexive 'zich'). 'hare moeder' is the old inflected possessive.
> omdat + impersonal men: 'omdat' sends 'noemt' to the end. 'men ... noemt' is the impersonal 'one calls'. 'mondig' = of age, legally independent — the supposed danger of the endearment.

Wat beduidt dat: voortdragen op je vleugels? Je hebt geen vleugels, en je gezang ook niet.  
What does it mean: to carry someone off on your wings? You have no wings, and no singing either.
> Separable voortdragen + possessive je: 'voortdragen' (to carry forth/away) is separable; quoted here as a bare infinitive. 'wat beduidt dat?' = what does that mean? 'je vleugels' = your wings (familiar possessive 'je').

Probeer 't eens over de Lauriergracht, die niet eens heel breed is.  
Just try it once across the Lauriergracht, which isn't even very wide.
> Imperative Probeer + relative die: 'Probeer' is a bare-stem imperative. The relative 'die' (de-word 'Lauriergracht') opens a verb-final clause 'die ... breed is'. 'niet eens' = not even.

Maar al had je vleugels, mag je dan zulke dingen voorstellen aan een meisje dat haar belydenis nog niet gedaan heeft? En al wàs 't kind aangenomen, wat beduidt dat aanbod van wegvliegen samen?  
But even if you had wings, may you put such notions to a girl who has not yet made her confirmation? And even were the child confirmed, what does that offer to fly away together amount to?
> Concessive al + irrealis had: 'al had je vleugels' = 'even if you had wings', a concessive with fronted 'al', inverted verb, and irrealis past 'had'. The main clause inverts after resumptive 'dan': 'mag je dan...?' (modal mogen).
> Relative dat + irrealis subjunctive wàs: 'dat ... gedaan heeft' relativizes het-word 'meisje'. 'al wàs 't kind aangenomen' = 'even were the child confirmed', a concessive with irrealis past 'wàs' and the passive participle 'aangenomen'.

Foei!  
For shame!

Fort nach den Fluren des Ganges, Da weiss ich den schönsten Ort;  
away to the meadows of the Ganges — there I know the loveliest place;

Ga er dan alleen heen, en huur er een optrek, maar neem niet een meisje mee, dat haar moeder moet helpen in 't huishouden!  
Go there alone, then, and rent yourself a lodging, but do not take a girl along who has to help her mother in the household!
> Imperatives + pronominal er + separable meenemen: Three imperatives: 'Ga ... heen' (separable heengaan, 'go thither'), 'huur', 'neem ... mee' (separable meenemen, 'take along'). 'er' here is the locative ('there'). 'maar' coordinates without verb-final.
> optrek — a lodging, a place: 'optrek' = a (modest) lodging, pied-à-terre, place to stay. A homely, slightly dismissive word Droogstoppel uses to puncture Heine's romantic 'fairest spot' by the Ganges.

Maar je meent het ook niet! Vooreerst heb je nooit den Ganges gezien, en kunt dus niet weten of 't daar goed leven is.  
But you don't even mean it! In the first place, you have never seen the Ganges, and so cannot know whether life is good there.
> Fronted Vooreerst + negation nooit + indirect of: Fronting 'Vooreerst' (in the first place) inverts: 'heb je'. 'nooit' is the single negation. The modal 'kunt' takes 'weten'; 'of 't daar goed leven is' is an indirect question, verb-final.

Wil ik je eens zeggen hoe de zaken staan?  
Shall I tell you how matters really stand?
> Modal willen as offer + embedded hoe: 'Wil ik ... zeggen?' uses 'willen' in a verb-first question to make an offer ('Shall I tell you...?'). 'hoe de zaken staan' is an embedded question, verb-final. 'hoe de zaken staan' = how matters stand.

Het zyn alles leugens, die je alleen dáárom vertelt, omdat je in al dat gevèrs je tot slaaf maakt van maat en rym.  
They are all lies, which you tell for one reason only: because in all that versifying you make yourself a slave to meter and rhyme.
> Pronominal daarom ... omdat; reflexive zich: 'dáárom ... omdat' = 'for the reason that' (the pronominal adverb 'daarom' anticipates the 'omdat'-clause). 'zich tot slaaf maken van' = to make oneself a slave to; reflexive 'je'.
> geverс, maat, rijm: 'gevèrs' (gevers) = the constant making of verses, with a faintly contemptuous ge-...-s pattern (cf. gedoe). 'maat' = metre, 'rym' (rijm) = rhyme. Droogstoppel's thesis: poets lie because metre and rhyme force them to.

Als de eerste regel geëindigd was op koek, wyn, kina, zou je aan Marie gevraagd hebben of ze meeging naar Broek, Berlyn, China, en zoo voort.  
If the first line had ended on cake, wine, china, you would have asked Marie whether she'd come along to Broek, Berlin, China, and so forth.
> Counterfactual: pluperfect + conditional perfect: A full counterfactual: the 'als'-clause has a pluperfect 'geëindigd was', and the main clause the conditional perfect 'zou je ... gevraagd hebben' ('you would have asked'). The rhyme-driven absurdity is the point.
> Droogstoppel's rhyme joke: He claims Heine chose the Ganges only to rhyme; had the line ended on koek/wyn/kina, the destination would have been Broek (a Dutch village), Berlyn, or China to match. 'kina' = quinine/cinchona. The joke literalizes his contempt for poetry.

Je ziet dus dat je voorgestelde reisroute niet oprecht gemeend was, en dat alles neerkomt op een laf geklinkklank van woorden zonder slot of zin.  
You see, then, that your proposed travel route was not sincerely meant, and that the whole thing comes down to a feeble jingle-jangle of words without point or sense.
> dat-clause + zijn-passive (state): 'dat ... gemeend was' is a subordinate clause with a stative zijn-passive 'was gemeend' ('was meant'), verb-final. 'voorgestelde' is the past participle of separable voorstellen used attributively ('proposed').
> geklinkklank; zonder slot of zin: 'geklinkklank' = empty jingle-jangle (the ge-...-pattern of contemptuous nouns, cf. geklets); 'laf' = feeble, insipid; 'zonder slot of zin' = without rhyme or reason, lit. 'without conclusion or sense'.

Hoe zou 't wezen, als Marie nu eens werkelyk lust kreeg om die malle reis te doen?  
How would it be if Marie now actually took it into her head to make that absurd journey?
> Conditional zou wezen + om ... te: 'Hoe zou 't wezen' is the conditional ('how would it be'). The 'als'-clause has irrealis past 'kreeg'; 'om die malle reis te doen' is a purpose clause. 'lust krijgen om' = to take a fancy to.

Ik spreek nu nog niet eens van de ongemakkelyke manier die je voorstelt!  
I won't even speak yet of the uncomfortable manner you propose!
> Present spreken van + relative die: 'spreken van' = to speak of. 'nog niet eens' = not even yet. The relative 'die' (de-word 'manier') opens a verb-final clause 'die je voorstelt' (which you propose; separable voorstellen).

Maar zy is, den Hemel zy dank, te verstandig om naar een land te verlangen, waarvan je zegt:  
But she is, Heaven be thanked, too sensible to long for a land of which you say:
> om … te for 'too … to': With te + adjective ('too sensible'), Dutch frames the consequence as an om … te purpose clause that closes on the infinitive verlangen. English collapses this to 'too sensible to long for'.
> Frozen subjunctive 'zy': zy here is not 'she' but an archaic subjunctive of zijn ('may … be'), surviving in this set phrase 'Heaven be thanked'. den Hemel also carries the old dative/accusative -n on the article.
> Pronominal adverb waarvan: Instead of 'van wat' ('of which'), Dutch fuses the preposition van with waar- into the relative adverb waarvan. Such waar-/daar- forms are obligatory when the antecedent is a thing.

Da liegt ein rothblühender Garten Im stillen mondesschein; Die Lotosblumen erwarten Ihr trautes Schwesterlein; Die Veilchen kichern und kosen, Und schau'n nach den Sternen empor; Heimlich erzählen die Rosen Sich düftende Märchen in 's Ohr.  
There lies a red-blossoming garden in the quiet moonlight; the lotus flowers await their dear little sister; the violets giggle and nuzzle and gaze up at the stars; secretly the roses whisper fragrant fairy-tales in one another's ear.

Wat wou je in dien tuin by maneschyn met Marie uitvoeren, Stern?  
What did you mean to get up to in that garden by moonlight with Marie, Stern?
> Separable verb uitvoeren: uitvoeren ('to get up to, carry out') is separable, but here the modal-flavored wou (wilde) keeps it whole as a final infinitive. wou is the colloquial past of willen.
> Period spelling: dien, by, maneschyn: 1860 spelling shows the old masculine accusative dien (modern die), y for ij in by ('by') and maneschyn ('moonlight'). Read y as ij throughout this text.

Is dat zedelyk, is dat braaf, is dat fatsoenlyk?  
Is that moral, is that proper, is that decent?
> Inversion in yes/no questions: A yes/no question puts the finite verb (is) first; this is the same V2 system seen from the other side, with the verb leading instead of standing second. The triple repetition is Droogstoppel's rhetorical hectoring.
> False friend: braaf: In this moralizing context braaf means 'upright, decent, well-behaved' — not English 'brave'. Droogstoppel's whole vocabulary (zedelyk, fatsoenlyk) is the bourgeois language of respectability.

Wil je dat ik beschaamd moet staan, evenals Busselinck & Waterman, met wie geen fatsoenlyk handelshuis iets te doen wil hebben, omdat hun dochter weggeloopen is, en omdat het knoeiers zyn?  
Do you want me to have to stand ashamed, just like Busselinck & Waterman, with whom no respectable trading house will have anything to do, because their daughter ran off, and because they are bunglers?
> Relative wie after a preposition: For a person governed by a preposition, Dutch uses met wie ('with whom'). geen negates the indefinite noun handelshuis, and the verb cluster wil hebben sits at the clause end.
> Subordinate omdat sends verbs to the end: omdat ('because') is a subordinating conjunction, so the perfect cluster weggeloopen is moves to the clause end. weggeloopen is the past participle of separable weglopen ('run away').
> knoeiers — bunglers: A knoeier is a botcher or shady dealer; in commercial mouth like Droogstoppel's it brands a rival firm as both incompetent and disreputable.

Wat zou ik moeten antwoorden, als men my op de beurs vroeg, waarom myn dochter zoo lang in dien rooien tuin is gebleven?  
What should I have to answer if I were asked on the exchange why my daughter stayed so long in that red garden?
> Conditional zou + impersonal men: zou + the verb cluster moeten antwoorden gives the conditional 'what should I have to answer'; men ('one') is the impersonal subject, and the als-clause pushes vroeg to the end.
> de beurs — the Exchange: The beurs is the Amsterdam commodities exchange where brokers like Droogstoppel meet; his fear is purely reputational — what the other traders would think.

Want dit begryp je toch, dat niemand me gelooven zou, als ik zei dat zy daar wezen moest om een bezoek te brengen aan de lotusbloemen die, zooals je zegt, haar al lang gewacht hebben.  
For you do understand this much, that no one would believe me if I said she had to be there to pay a visit to the lotus flowers which, as you say, have long been waiting for her.
> Negative word niemand + conditional: niemand ('no one') is the single negative carrying the clause; gelooven zou is the conditional with zou at the end, governed by subordinating dat.
> Purpose clause om … te: om … te brengen frames the purpose ('in order to pay a visit'). The light verb idiom een bezoek brengen aan means 'to pay a visit to'.
> Relative die for a de-word plural: die introduces the relative clause on lotusbloemen (a plural, hence die), and the perfect gewacht hebben goes to the end. Note the dialectal gewacht for 'awaited'.

Even zoo zou ieder verstandig mensch my uitlachen, als ik gek genoeg was om te zeggen: Marie is daar in dien rooien tuin waarom rood, en niet geel of paars?--om te luisteren naar 't snappen en giechelen van de viooltjes, of naar de sprookjes die de rozen elkaar heimelyk in 't oor blazen. Al kon zoo iets waar zyn, wat zou Marie er aan hebben, als het toch zoo heimelijk geschiedt, dat zy er niets van verstaat?  
Just so, every sensible person would laugh at me if I were foolish enough to say: Marie is there in that red garden — why red, and not yellow or purple? — to listen to the chattering and giggling of the violets, or to the fairy tales the roses whisper to one another secretly in the ear. Even if such a thing could be true, what good would it do Marie, if it all happens so secretly that she understands none of it?
> gek genoeg om te zeggen: The pattern adjective + genoeg + om te + infinitive ('foolish enough to say') is the standard Dutch frame for 'enough to'. The als-clause supplies the condition for the conditional zou … uitlachen in the main clause.
> Split pronominal adverb er … aan: The idiom er aan hebben ('to get something out of it') splits the pronominal adverb eraan around the verb. Here er stands in for the unreal scenario just described.
> Concessive 'al' + inversion: al + inverted verb (kon) means 'even if', a concessive without 'als'. The subjunctive flavor of kon … zyn marks it as hypothetical: 'even if such a thing could be true'.

Maar leugens zyn het, flauwe leugens! En leelyk zyn ze ook, want neem eens een potlood, en teeken een roos met een oor, en zie eens hoe dat er uitziet?  
But lies they are, feeble lies! And ugly besides, for take up a pencil and draw a rose with an ear, and see how that looks.
> Fronting for emphasis: Normal order would be Het zyn leugens; fronting leugens ('lies') throws the emphasis forward and forces the verb zyn to stay second — V2 in action. flauwe takes -e as an attributive adjective before a plural.
> Imperatives neem, teeken: Bare-stem imperatives (neem 'take', teeken 'draw') issue the command; eens softens it to 'just take'. The period spelling teeken doubles the vowel (modern teken).

En wat beduidt het, dat die Märchen zoo düftend zyn?  
And what is the meaning of those Märchen being so düftend?
> Present participle as predicate: düftend is Heine's German present participle ('fragrant'), which Droogstoppel mockingly quotes; the Dutch -end participle works the same way as a predicate adjective. zyn closes the dat-clause.

Wil ik je dat eens zeggen in goed rond hollandsch?  
Shall I tell you that in plain, round Dutch?
> Modal wil in an offer: Inverted willen here softens to an offer ('Shall I tell you?'), sending the main verb zeggen to the end as a bare infinitive. dat is the demonstrative object 'that'.
> Idiom: rond hollandsch: 'Plain, round Dutch' means blunt, unvarnished speech — the no-nonsense honesty the merchant prides himself on, opposed to Stern's flowery German.

Dat wil zeggen dat er een luchtjen is aan die malle sprookjes ... zóó is het!  
It means that there's something fishy about those silly fairy tales ... that's what it is!
> Existential er + diminutive luchtjen: Existential er introduces 'there is', and luchtjen is the diminutive of lucht ('a little smell'). The idiom een luchtje aan iets means 'something fishy about it'.

Da hüpfen herbei, und lauschen Die frommen, klugen Gazellen; Und in der Ferne rausche Des heiligen Stromes Wellen...  
There the gentle, clever gazelles come bounding up and listen; and far off murmur the waves of the holy river...

Da wollen wir niedersinken Unter den Palmenbaum, Und Ruhe und Liebe trinken, Und träumen seligen Traum.  
There let us sink down beneath the palm tree, and drink in peace and love, and dream a blessed dream.

Kan je niet naar Artis gaan--je hebt immers aan je vader geschreven dat ik lid ben?--zeg, kan je niet in Artis terecht, als je dan volstrekt vreemde dieren zien wilt?  
Can't you go to Artis — you've written to your father, haven't you, that I'm a member? — tell me, can't you make do with Artis, if you absolutely must see foreign animals?
> Modal kunnen + final infinitive: Inverted kan je opens the question, and the modal kunnen sends the main verb gaan to the end as a bare infinitive. niet negates the verb (not a noun), hence niet rather than geen.

Moeten het juist die gazellen aan den Ganges wezen, die toch in 't wild nooit zoo goed zyn waartenemen, als in een nette omheining van gekoolteerd yzer?  
Must it be precisely those gazelles by the Ganges, which after all can never be observed so well in the wild as in a tidy enclosure of tarred iron?
> te-infinitive of ability + joined spelling: zyn … waar te nemen means 'are to be observed/can be observed'; 1860 prints the te-infinitive as one word waartenemen. nooit is the single negative for 'never'.
> gekoolteerd — tarred: gekoolteerd (from teer, 'tar') describes the tarred iron of the zoo enclosure; the bathetic detail underscores Droogstoppel's preference for the tidy and man-made over the wild.

Waarom noem je die dieren vroom en verstandig?  
Why do you call those animals pious and wise?
> Question word + inversion: After the question word waarom the subject and verb invert (noem je), keeping the finite verb in second position. die dieren are the demonstrative object 'those animals'.

Het laatste laat ik gelden--ze maken althans zulke zotte verzen niet--maar: vroom?  
The latter I'll let pass — at least they don't make such foolish verses — but: pious?
> Causative/permissive laten: laten + infinitive (gelden) here means 'to let pass / allow to stand'. Fronting the object Het laatste ('the latter') forces inversion, so the verb laat stays second.
> zulk(e) — such: zulke ('such') is a literary-flavored determiner; with zotte ('foolish') it drips contempt for poetry. zulk belongs to the older/solemn register the brief flags as archaïsch.

Wat beteekent dat!  
What does that mean!
> Exclamatory question word order: Though punctuated as an exclamation, the clause keeps V2 question order with the verb beteekent second after Wat. beteekent shows the doubled-vowel period spelling of betekent ('mean').

Is 't niet misbruik maken van een heilige uitdrukking die alleen mag gebruikt worden voor menschen van 't ware geloof?  
Is it not a misuse of a holy expression that may be applied only to people of the true faith?
> Modal + passive infinitive: mag gebruikt worden stacks a modal (mogen) over a worden-passive infinitive: 'may be used'. The relative die refers back to uitdrukking and sends the cluster to the end.
> Impersonal/dummy 't and nominalized infinitive: 't (het) is the dummy subject of the question, and misbruik maken ('to misuse') functions as a nominalized infinitive complement. Reductions like 't for het and 'maken van' are everyday speech rhythm.

En dan die heilige stroom?  
And then that holy stream?

Mag je aan Marie dingen vertellen, die haar tot een heidin zouden maken? Mag je haar doen wankelen in de overtuiging dat er geen ander heilig water is, dan dat van den doop, en geen andere heilige rivier dan de Jordaan?  
May you tell Marie things that would turn her into a heathen? May you make her waver in the conviction that there is no other holy water than that of baptism, and no other holy river than the Jordan?
> Conditional zouden + feminine-derived noun: zouden maken is the conditional 'would make'; tot … maken means 'turn into'. heidin is the feminine of heiden ('heathen woman'), with haar as the object pronoun 'her'.
> Causative doen + bare infinitive: doen wankelen ('cause to waver') is a causative with doen, parallel to laten, taking a bare infinitive. The modal mag opens the question by inversion.

Is dit niet ondermynen van zedelykheid, deugd, godsdienst, christendom en fatsoen?  
Is this not an undermining of morality, virtue, religion, Christianity, and decency?
> Nominalized infinitive as predicate: ondermynen ('to undermine') is used as a noun ('an undermining of'), a common Dutch nominalized infinitive. The piled-up abstractions (deugd, godsdienst, fatsoen) parody the merchant's moral bluster.

Denk over dit alles eens na, Stern!  
Think all of this over once, Stern!
> Separable verb nadenken split by imperative: The imperative of nadenken ('think over') splits: the stem Denk leads and the prefix na lands at the end (Denk … na). over dit alles is the prepositional object in between.

Je vader is een achtenswaardig huis, en ik ben zeker dat hy 't goedvindt dat ik zoo op je gemoed werk, en dat hy gaarne zaken doet met iemand die deugd en godsdienst voorstaat. Ja, principes zyn me heilig, en ik heb geen schroom om ronduit te zeggen wat ik meen.  
Your father is a respectable house, and I am sure he approves of my working so on your conscience, and that he gladly does business with someone who upholds virtue and religion. Yes, principles are sacred to me, and I have no qualms about saying outright what I mean.
> Stacked dat-clauses, verb-final: Two dat-clauses nest: each subordinator drives its verb to the end (goedvindt, werk). goedvindt is from separable goedvinden ('approve'), here written solid because no element intervenes.
> Dative me ('to me'): me is the unstressed dative 'to me' (iets is iemand heilig = 'something is sacred to someone'). zyn (are) stays second after the fronted subject principes.

Maak dus geen geheim van wat ik je zeg, schryf 't gerust aan je vader dat je hier in een soliede familie bent, en dat ik je zoo op 't goede wys. En vraag jezelf eens af, wat er van je zou geworden zyn, als je by Busselinck & Waterman waart gekomen?  
So make no secret of what I tell you; write to your father with an easy mind that you are here in a sound family, and that I am guiding you so well toward the good. And ask yourself what would have become of you if you had landed with Busselinck & Waterman.
> Imperative + geen + free relative wat: Maak is the imperative; geen negates the indefinite noun geheim ('make no secret'); wat ik je zeg is a headless relative ('of what I tell you'). dus ('so') is a coordinating connector and does not throw the verb to the end.
> Conditional + pluperfect 'waart gekomen': The main clause uses conditional zou … geworden zyn ('would have become'); the als-clause uses the pluperfect subjunctive waart gekomen — an unreal past condition. waart is the archaic 2nd-person past of zijn.

Dáár zou je ook zulke verzen opgezegd hebben, en dáár had men niet op je gemoed gewerkt, omdat het knoeiers zyn.  
There too you would have recited such verses, and there no one would have worked upon your conscience, because they are bunglers.
> Conditional perfect with separable verb: zou … opgezegd hebben is the conditional perfect ('would have recited'). opgezegd is the participle of separable opzeggen, and fronting Dáár forces the inversion zou je.

Schryf dit gerust aan je vader, want als er principes in 't spel zyn, ontzie ik niemand.  
Write this freely to your father, for when principles are in play, I spare no one.
> want (coordinating) vs als (subordinating): want ('for') joins clauses without verb-final order, but the embedded als-clause does send its verb to the end (zyn). The main clause then inverts (ontzie ik) because the als-clause occupies first position.

Dáár zouden de meisjes met je meegegaan zyn naar den Ganges, en dan lag je daar nu misschien onder dien boom in 't natte gras, terwyl je nu, omdat ik je zoo vaderlyk waarschuwde, hier by ons kunt blyven in een fatsoenlyk huis.  
There the girls would have gone off with you to the Ganges, and then you might be lying now under that tree in the wet grass, whereas now, because I warned you so fatherly, you can stay here with us in a decent house.
> Imperfect lag in a hypothetical present: After the unreal conditional, the simple past lag ('lay') expresses a present hypothetical ('you might be lying now'). Dutch often uses the imperfect this way for counterfactual present situations.
> Subordinating terwyl: terwyl ('whereas/while') is subordinating, so the modal cluster kunt blyven moves to the clause end. It contrasts the imagined Ganges fate with the safe present.

Schryf dat alles aan je vader, en zeg hem dat je zoo dankbaar bent dat je by ons zyt gekomen, en dat ik zoo goed voor je zorg, en dat de dochter van Busselinck & Waterman is weggeloopen, en groet hem zeer van my, en schryf dat ik nog 1/16 procent courtage zal laten vallen beneden hun bod, omdat ik geen onderkruipers lyden kan, die een konkurrent het brood uit den mond stelen door gunstiger voorwaarden.  
Write all this to your father, and tell him that you are so grateful to have come to us, and that I take such good care of you, and that the daughter of Busselinck & Waterman has run off, and give him my warmest greetings, and write that I will drop another 1/16 percent of brokerage below their bid, because I cannot abide underminers who steal the bread from a competitor's mouth by offering more favorable terms.
> Perfect with zijn for motion + archaic zyt: Verbs of motion/change like komen form the perfect with zijn, not hebben (zyt gekomen, 'have come'). zyt is the archaic 2nd-person form of zijn (modern bent).
> Future zullen + causative laten vallen: zal … laten vallen stacks the future zullen over the causative idiom laten vallen ('let drop / lower'), all clustered at the end after subordinating dat.

En doe me toch 't genoegen, in je voorlezingen uit Sjaalman's pak, wat meer degelyks te brengen.  
And do me the favor, in your readings from Sjaalman's parcel, of bringing something more solid.
> Imperative + partitive genitive degelyks: doe is the imperative; wat meer degelyks ('something more solid') is a partitive construction where the adjective takes -s after wat/iets. The te-infinitive te brengen completes the request.

Ik heb er opgaven gezien van de koffi-produktie der laatste twintig jaren, uit alle residentien op Java: lees zóó-iets eens voor! Zieje, dan kunnen de Rosemeyers, die in suiker doen, eens te hooren krygen wat er eigenlyk omgaat in de wereld.  
I have seen returns there on the coffee production of the last twenty years, from all the residencies in Java: read something like that aloud! You see, then the Rosemeyers, who are in sugar, can hear for once what really goes on in the world.
> Genitive der ('of the'): der is the frozen genitive/dative form of de, here 'of the last twenty years'. In modern Dutch this would be van de. koffi shows the period spelling of koffie.
> Separable omgaan + existential er: omgaat is from separable omgaan ('to go on, happen'); wat is the headless relative subject and er signals existence ('what really goes on'). The verb sits late in the embedded clause.

En je moet ook de meisjes en ons allen niet zoo uitmaken voor kannibalen die wat van je hebben opgeslikt ... dit is niet fatsoenlyk, myn beste jongen. Geloof toch iemand die weet wat er in de wereld te koop is!  
And you mustn't make out the girls and all of us to be cannibals who've swallowed something of yours ... that's not decent, my dear boy. Do believe someone who knows what's to be had in the world!
> Modal moeten + niet + separable uitmaken: moet … uitmaken voor ('make out to be') is a modal over a separable verb; niet negates the whole action. ons allen is 'all of us' as the object.
> Imperative + relative die + te koop idiom: Geloof is the imperative; die weet is a relative clause on iemand. The idiom wat er te koop is ('what's to be had / what's going on') uses existential er plus te koop.

Ik heb je vader reeds bediend voor zyn geboorte--zyn firma, meen ik, neen ... ònze firma, meen ik: Last & Co--vroeger was het Last & Meyer, maar de Meyers zyn er lang uit--je begrypt dus dat ik 't goed met je meen.  
I served your father even before he was born — his firm, I mean, no ... our firm, I mean: Last & Co — earlier it was Last & Meyer, but the Meyers have long been out — so you understand that I mean well by you.
> Present perfect heb … bediend: heb … bediend is the present perfect of bedienen ('to serve'), with the participle at the end. The absurd claim ('before he was born') marks Droogstoppel's bluster.
> Pronominal er with separable uit: er uit zyn ('to be out of it') uses er for the firm and uit as the stranded particle: 'the Meyers have long been out (of the firm)'. lang here means 'long since'.

En spoor Frits aan, dat hy wat beter oppast, en leer hem geen verzen maken, en houd je alsof je het niet zag, als hy gezichten trekt tegen den boekhouder, en al zulke dingen meer.  
And urge Frits to pay better attention, and don't teach him to make verses, and pretend not to notice when he pulls faces at the bookkeeper, and all such things besides.
> Separable aansporen + oppassen: The imperative of aansporen ('urge on') splits (spoor … aan); the dat-clause then sends oppast (from separable oppassen, 'pay attention') to its end.
> Reflexive zich houden + alsof: zich houden alsof ('to act as if') is reflexive — here je is the 2nd-person reflexive. alsof ('as if') is subordinating, so zag goes to the end; the imperfect zag gives an unreal sense.

Geef hem een goed voorbeeld, omdat je zooveel ouder bent, en tracht hem bedaardheid en deftigheid inteprenten, want hy moet makelaar worden.  
Set him a good example, since you are so much older, and try to instill composure and dignity in him, for he is to become a broker.
> te-infinitive written solid: inteprenten: trachten ('try') governs a te-infinitive, here the separable inprenten ('to instill'), printed as one word inteprenten in 1860 style (modern in te prenten). The two abstract -heid nouns are the things instilled.
> Modal moeten of destiny + want: moet … worden expresses what is ordained ('he is to become'); makelaar ('broker') takes no article in this predicate. want ('for') coordinates and leaves word order untouched.

Ik ben je vaderlyke vriend  
I am your fatherly friend,
> Adjective -e: vaderlyke: vaderlyke takes -e as an attributive adjective before the de-word vriend ('fatherly friend'). The phrase is the unctuous sign-off of the sanctimonious merchant.

Batavus Droogstoppel.  
Batavus Droogstoppel.

(firma: Last & Co, makelaars in koffi, Lauriergracht, N° 37.)  
(firm: Last & Co, coffee brokers, Lauriergracht, No. 37.)

ELFDE HOOFDSTUK  
ELEVENTH CHAPTER
> elfde — eleventh: elfde is the ordinal 'eleventh' (from elf, 'eleven'); hoofdstuk ('chapter') is a neuter compound of hoofd ('head/main') + stuk ('piece').
---

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.