# Max Havelaar, Chapter 4

Max Havelaar · Multatuli · The Novel

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-4. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-4.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/havelaar/<line id>.m4a.


Over het begrip van eer. Over de apokriefe boeken.  
On the notion of honour. On the apocryphal books.

Over de wetten van SOLON, LYKURGUS, ZOROASTER en CONFUCIUS.  
On the laws of SOLON, LYCURGUS, ZOROASTER and CONFUCIUS.

Over de ouderlyke macht. Over SHAKESPEARE als geschiedschryver.  
On parental authority. On SHAKESPEARE as a historian.

Over de slaverny in Europa. (Wat hy hiermee bedoelt, begryp ik niet. Nu, zoo is er meer!)  
On slavery in Europe. (What he means by this I do not grasp. Well, there is more of that sort!)
> Fronted object clause + 'hiermee': The whole indirect question 'wat hy hiermee bedoelt' is fronted as the object, so the main verb 'begryp' inverts before 'ik'. 'Hiermee' is the pronominal adverb 'with this'.

Over schroefwatermolens. Over het souverein recht van gratie.  
On screw water-mills. On the sovereign right of pardon.

Over de chemische bestanddeelen der ceylonsche kaneel. Over de tucht op koopvaardyschepen.  
On the chemical components of Ceylon cinnamon. On discipline aboard merchant ships.

Over de opiumpacht op Java.  
On the opium farm in Java.

Over de bepalingen omtrent het verkopen van gif. Over het doorgraven der landengten van Suez, en de gevolgen daarvan.  
On the regulations concerning the sale of poison. On the cutting-through of the Isthmus of Suez, and the consequences thereof.

Over de betaling, van landrenten in naturâ. Over de koffikultuur te Menado. (Dit heb ik al genoemd.)  
On the payment of land-rents in kind. On coffee cultivation at Menado. (This I have already mentioned.)

Over de scheuring van het romeinsche ryk. Over de GEMÜTHLICHKEIT der Duitschers.  
On the partition of the Roman Empire. On the GEMÜTHLICHKEIT of the Germans.

Over de skandinavische EDDA. Over den plicht van Frankryk, om in den indischen Archipel zich een tegenwicht tegen Engeland te verschaffen. (Dit was in 't fransch, ik weet niet waarom?)  
On the Scandinavian EDDA. On the duty of France to secure for itself, in the Indian Archipelago, a counterweight against England. (This was in French, I do not know why?)
> Reflexive in 'om ... te': 'Om ... zich ... te verschaffen' (in order to secure for itself) embeds the reflexive 'zich' in a purpose clause closing on the 'te'-infinitive 'te verschaffen'.

Over het azyn maken. Over de vereering van SCHILLER en GÖTHE in den duitschen middenstand.  
On the making of vinegar. On the veneration of SCHILLER and GOETHE among the German middle class.

Over de aanspraken van den mensch op geluk. Over het recht van opstand by onderdrukking. (Dit was in 't javaansch.  
On the claims of man to happiness. On the right of revolt under oppression. (This was in Javanese.

Ik ben dien titel eerst later te weten gekomen.) Over ministerieele verantwoordelykheid.  
Its title I only came to know later.) On ministerial accountability.

Over eenige punten in de krimineele rechtsvordering. Over het recht van een volk, te eischen dat de opgebrachte belasting ten-zynen-behoeve worde aangewend. (Dat was weer in 't javaansch.)  
On certain points in criminal procedure. On the right of a people to demand that the taxes levied be applied for its own benefit. (That was again in Javanese.)
> Subjunctive passive 'worde aangewend': 'Worde aangewend' is a present-subjunctive worden-passive (be applied), the solemn 'worde' marking a demand. 'Opgebrachte' is an attributive past participle; 'ten-zynen-behoeve' freezes an old dative ('for its benefit').

Over de dubbele A en de grieksche ETA.  
On the double A and the Greek ETA.

Over het bestaan van een onpersoonlyken God in de harten der menschen. (Een infame leugen!) Over den styl.  
On the existence of an impersonal God in the hearts of men. (An infamous lie!) On style.

Over een konstitutie voor het Ryk INSULINDE. (Ik heb nooit van dat Ryk gehoord.) Over het gebrek aan ephelkustiek in onze taalregels.  
On a constitution for the Empire of INSULINDE. (I have never heard of that Empire.) On the lack of the linking-n convention in our language rules.

Over pedanterie. (Ik geloof dat dit stuk met veel kennis van zaken geschreven is.) Over de verplichting van Europa aan de Portugezen.  
On pedantry. (I believe this piece is written with great expertise.) On Europe's debt to the Portuguese.

Over boschgeluiden. Over brandbaarheid van water. (Ik denk dat hy sterk water bedoelt.)  
On forest sounds. On the combustibility of water. (I think he means aqua fortis.)
> 'sterk water' = aqua fortis: Droogstoppel guesses Sjaalman's 'brandbaarheid van water' (combustibility of water) means 'sterk water' — literally 'strong water', i.e. nitric acid (aqua fortis). A typically literal misreading.

Over de melkzee. (Ik heb daarvan nooit gehoord. Het schynt iets in de nabyheid van Banda te zyn.)  
On the milk-sea. (I have never heard of it. It seems to be something in the vicinity of Banda.)
> 'schijnen ... te zijn': 'Het schynt ... te zyn' (it seems to be) uses dummy 'het' with 'schijnen' governing the 'te'-infinitive 'te zyn'. 'In de nabyheid van' = in the vicinity of.

Over zieners en profeten. Over elektriciteit als beweegkracht, zonder week yzer.  
On seers and prophets. On electricity as a motive power, without soft iron.

Over ebbe en vloed der beschaving. Over epidemisch bederf in staathuishoudingen.  
On the ebb and flow of civilization. On epidemic corruption in the management of states.

Over bevoorrechte Handelmaatschappyen. (Hierin komt een-en-ander voor, dat ik noodig heb voor myn boek.) Over etymologie als hulpbron by ethnologische studien.  
On privileged trading companies. (There is one thing and another in this that I need for my book.) On etymology as an aid in ethnological studies.

Over de vogelnestklippen aan de javasche Zuidkust. Over de plaats waar de dag aanvangt. (Dit begryp ik niet.)  
On the birds'-nest cliffs along the southern coast of Java. On the place where the day begins. (This I do not understand.)

Over persoonlyke begrippen als maatstaf der verantwoordelykheid in de zedelyke wereld. (Bespottelyk! Hy zegt dat ieder zyn eigen rechter moet wezen.  
On personal convictions as the measure of responsibility in the moral world. (Ridiculous! He says that everyone must be his own judge.
> Modal 'moet wezen' verb-final: In the 'dat'-clause 'moet wezen' (must be) clusters at the end, modal before infinitive. 'Wezen' is the older infinitive of 'zijn', common in 1860. 'Ieder' = everyone.

Waar zou dat heen?) Over galanterie.  
Where would that lead?) On gallantry.
> Elliptical 'zou ... heen': 'Waar zou dat heen?' is an elliptical conditional question (where would that lead?), with the infinitive of motion ('gaan/leiden') understood and only the separable directional 'heen' left. A colloquial flourish.

Over den versbouw der Hebreën. Over de CENTURY OF INVENTIONS van den Markies van Worcester.  
On the versification of the Hebrews. On the CENTURY OF INVENTIONS by the Marquis of Worcester.

Over de niet-etende bevolking van het eiland Rotti by Timor. (Het moet daar goedkoop leven zyn.) Over het menschen-eten der Battah's, en het koppensnellen der Alfoeren.  
On the non-eating population of the island of Rotti near Timor. (Living there must be cheap.) On the man-eating of the Battas, and the head-hunting of the Alfurs.
> Impersonal 'het is goedkoop leven': 'Het ... goedkoop leven zyn' nominalizes the infinitive 'leven' as a subject ('living is cheap there'), with dummy 'het' and the modal 'moet' (must be). 'Daar' = there.

Over het wantrouwen op de publieke zedelykheid. (Hy wil, geloof ik, de slotenmakers afschaffen. Ik ben er tegen.)  
On distrust of public morality. (He wants, I believe, to abolish the locksmiths. I am against it.)
> 'er tegen' pronominal adverb: 'Ik ben er tegen' = I am against it, where 'er tegen' is the pronominal adverb 'tegen het' (against it). 'Wil ... afschaffen' shows modal + clause-final separable infinitive.

Over "het recht" en de "rechten." Over BÉRANGER als wysgeer. (Dit begryp ik weer niet)  
On "right" and "rights." On BÉRANGER as a philosopher. (This too I fail to understand)

Over den afkeer der Maleiers van den Javaan. Over de onwaarde van het onderwys op de zoogenaamde hoogescholen.  
On the Malays' aversion to the Javanese. On the worthlessness of the instruction given at the so-called universities.
> Compound 'hoogescholen' / 'onwaarde': 'Hoogescholen' (high-schools, i.e. universities) and 'onwaarde' (un-worth, worthlessness) are compounds; the prefix 'on-' negates the noun. 'Zoogenaamde' = so-called, with the period 'oo' and -de participle ending.

Over den liefdeloozen geest onzer voorouders, blykbaar uit hun begrippen omtrent God. (Alweer een goddeloos stuk!) Over den samenhang der zintuigen. ('t Is waar, toen ik hem zag, rook ik rozenolie.)  
On the loveless spirit of our forefathers, evident from their notions about God. (Another godless piece!) On the connection of the senses. (It is true—when I saw him, I smelled attar of roses.)
> Genitive 'onzer voorouders': 'Onzer voorouders' is the old genitive of 'onze' (of our forefathers). 'Liefdeloozen' carries the accusative -en after 'over'; 'blykbaar uit' = evident from.
> 'toen' + V2 main clause: 'Toen ik hem zag' sends 'zag' to the end; the main clause then inverts, 'rook ik' (I smelled). Both 'zag' and 'rook' are strong simple pasts (zien/ruiken).

Over den puntwortel van den koffiboom. (Dit heb ik ter-zy gelegd voor myn boek.)  
On the taproot of the coffee plant. (This I have set aside for my book.)
> Fronted object + perfect 'heb ... gelegd': Fronting 'dit' inverts 'heb ik'; 'ter-zy gelegd' (set aside) is the perfect of 'terzijde leggen'. 'Ter-zy' freezes the old dative 'ter' (te + der). The recurring 'voor myn boek' is Droogstoppel's refrain.

Over gevoel, gevoeligheid, SENSIBLERIE, EMPFINDELEI, enz. Over het verwarren van Mythologie en Godsdienst.  
On feeling, sentimentality, SENSIBLERIE, EMPFINDELEI, etc. On the confusion of Mythology with Religion.

Over de saguweer in de Molukken.  
On the saguweer of the Moluccas.

Over de toekomst van den nederlandschen handel. (Dit is eigenlyk 't stuk dat me bewogen heeft, myn boek te schryven. Hy zegt dat er niet altyd zulke groote koffiveilingen zullen gehouden worden, en ik leef voor myn vak.)  
On the future of Dutch commerce. (This is really the piece that moved me to write my book. He says that such great coffee auctions will not always be held, and I live for my trade.)
> Frozen dative -en after 'den': The article 'den' and the adjective ending '-schen' are old masculine accusative/dative case forms, dead in modern Dutch but routine in 1860 prose. Today this would simply be 'de Nederlandse handel'.
> Relative 'dat' for a het-word: Because 'stuk' is a neuter het-word, the relative pronoun is 'dat' rather than 'die'. The perfect 'heeft bewogen' wraps around the clause with its participle at the end.
> Future passive stacked at the end: Here 'zullen' (future) governs the passive 'gehouden worden', piling 'gehouden worden' as a verb cluster at the end of the subordinate clause. The worden-passive presents the auctions as undergoing the action of being held.

Over Genesis. (Een infaam stuk!)  
On Genesis. (An infamous piece!)
> infaam — infamous/shameful: A French-derived word meaning 'infamous' or 'disgraceful'. Droogstoppel's parenthetical outbursts ('Een infaam stuk!') mark the pieces whose freethinking content scandalizes his bourgeois piety.

Over de geheime genootschappen der Chinezen. Over het teekenen als natuurlyk schrift. (Hy zegt dat een pasgeboren kind teekenen kan!)  
On the secret societies of the Chinese. On drawing as a natural script. (He says that a newborn child can draw!)
> Infinitive as a neuter noun: An infinitive used as a noun ('het teekenen', the drawing/act of drawing) is always a het-word, hence the article 'het'. Note the period spelling 'teekenen' (modern 'tekenen') with doubled vowel.
> Modal sends the verb to the end: In this 'dat'-clause the modal 'kan' takes the final position after the bare infinitive 'teekenen', the verb-final order required by the subordinating 'dat'.

Over waarheid in poëzie. (Wel zeker!) Over de impopulariteit der ryst pelmolens op Java.  
On truth in poetry. (To be sure!) On the unpopularity of rice-hulling mills in Java.
> Genitive plural 'der': 'Der' is the frozen genitive (and feminine/plural) case form meaning 'of the', here 'the unpopularity of the rice-hulling mills'. Modern Dutch would use 'van de'.

Over het verband tusschen Poëzie en mathematische wetenschappen. Over de Wajangs der Chinezen.  
On the connection between Poetry and the mathematical sciences. On the Wayangs of the Chinese.

Over den prys van de Java-koffi. (Dit heb ik ter-zy gelegd.) Over een europeesch muntstelsel.  
On the price of Java coffee. (This I have set aside.) On a European currency system.
> Fronting + V2 + separable verb: The object 'Dit' is fronted, so the finite verb 'heb' stands second and the subject 'ik' follows it. The participle of the separable verb 'ter-zy leggen' (to set aside) closes the clause as 'ter-zy gelegd'.

Over besproejing van gemeene velden. Over den invloed van de vermenging, van rassen op den geest.  
On the irrigation of common fields. On the influence that the mingling of races has upon the mind.
> Dative 'den' after a preposition: 'Op den geest' ('upon the mind') keeps the old masculine dative 'den' after the preposition. Modern Dutch levels this to 'op de geest'.
> gemeen — 'common', not 'mean': A false friend: here 'gemeene' (modern 'gemene') means 'common/communal' (shared fields), not its more frequent modern sense of 'nasty/vile'.

Over evenwicht in den handel. (Hy spreekt daarin van wisselagio. Ik heb het ter-zy gelegd voor myn boek.)  
On equilibrium in trade. (In it he speaks of exchange premium. I have set it aside for my book.)
> Pronominal adverb 'daarin': 'Daarin' ('in it / therein') fuses the preposition 'in' with a 'daar-' element replacing a thing — you cannot say 'in het' for an inanimate object. This pronominal-adverb pattern is everywhere in Dutch.
> wisselagio — exchange premium: A finance term: the agio, or premium, on a bill of exchange. Droogstoppel sets it aside 'voor myn boek' precisely because it touches commerce, his only real interest.

Over het standhouden van aziatische gewoonten (Hy beweert dat Jezus een tulband droeg.)  
On the persistence of Asiatic customs (He claims that Jesus wore a turban.)
> Simple past in a 'dat'-clause: 'Droeg' is the strong simple past of 'dragen' (to wear/carry), with a vowel change a→oe rather than a dental ending. In this 'dat'-clause it sits at the very end.

Over de denkbeelden van MALTHUS omtrent het cyfer der bevolking, in verband met de onderhoudsmiddelen. Over de oorspronkelyke bevolking van Amerika.  
On the ideas of MALTHUS regarding the size of the population in relation to the means of subsistence. On the original population of America.
> cyfer — figure/number: 'Cyfer' (modern 'cijfer', with period y-for-ij) means 'figure' or 'number', here 'the size of the population'. The genitive 'der bevolking' again replaces modern 'van de bevolking'.

Over de havenhoofden te Batavia, Samarang en Soerabaja. Over bouwkunde, als uitdrukking van denkbeelden.  
On the harbour-piers at Batavia, Samarang and Surabaya. On architecture as the expression of ideas.

Over de verhouding der europesche ambtenaren tot de Regenten op Java. (Hiervan komt een-en-ander in myn boek.) Over het wonen in kelders, te Amsterdam.  
On the relations of the European officials to the Regents in Java. (Some of this goes into my book.) On dwelling in cellars, at Amsterdam.
> Genitive 'der' + period adjective: 'Der europesche ambtenaren' is a genitive ('of the European officials'). Note 'europesche', the 1860 spelling with -sch-, where modern Dutch writes 'Europese'.

Over de kracht der dwaling. Over de werkeloosheid van een Opperwezen, by volmaakte natuurwetten.  
On the power of error. On the idleness of a Supreme Being, given perfect laws of nature.
> Period spelling 'by': 'By' is the 1860 spelling of modern 'bij' (here 'given / in the case of perfect laws of nature'), one of many words where y replaces the modern ij digraph.
> Opperwezen — Supreme Being: A compound (opper- 'supreme' + wezen 'being') for the deity; the freethinking jab is that perfect natural laws would leave such a Being idle ('werkeloosheid').

Over het zoutmonopolie op Java. Over de wormen in den sagopalm. (Die worden, zegt hy, gegeten ... bah!)  
On the salt monopoly in Java. On the worms in the sago palm. (These, he says, are eaten ... bah!)
> Worden-passive: 'are eaten': 'Worden gegeten' is the process passive: the worms 'are (being) eaten'. 'Worden' is the passive auxiliary and 'gegeten' the past participle of 'eten' (strong verb, vowel e→e but ge-...-en form).

Over de Spreuken, den Prediker, het Hooglied, en de PANTOENS der Javanen. Over het JUS PRIMI OCCUPANTIS.  
On the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and the PANTOENS of the Javanese. On the JUS PRIMI OCCUPANTIS.

Over de armoede der schilderkunst. Over de onzedelykheid van het hengelen. (Wie heeft ooit daarvan gehoord?)  
On the poverty of the art of painting. On the immorality of angling. (Whoever has heard of such a thing?)
> Substantivized infinitive: 'Het hengelen' (the angling) is again an infinitive turned into a neuter noun with 'het'. The mock-treatise calls fishing 'onzedelyk' (immoral) — Droogstoppel's bafflement is the joke.
> 'Wie' question + pronominal 'daarvan': 'Wie' opens an interrogative with the perfect 'heeft ... gehoord' wrapping the clause, and 'daarvan' ('of that') fuses 'van' with a 'daar-' element rather than using 'van het'.

Over de misdaden der Europeërs buiten Europa. Over de wapenen der zwakkere diersoorten.  
On the crimes of Europeans outside Europe. On the weapons of the weaker animal species.
> Comparative + genitive 'der': 'Zwakkere' is the comparative of 'zwak' (weak → weaker), formed with -er, agreeing here in the attributive -e form. 'Der ... diersoorten' is once more the genitive 'of the'.

Over het JUS TALIONIS. (Alweer een infaam stuk! Daarin kwam een gedicht voor, dat ik zeker allerschandelykst zou gevonden hebben, als ik 't uitgelezen had.)  
On the JUS TALIONIS. (Yet another infamous piece! In it there was a poem that I would surely have found utterly scandalous, had I read it to the end.)
> Conditional 'zou' + pluperfect 'had uitgelezen': The main clause uses 'zou ... gevonden hebben' (conditional perfect, 'would have found'); the 'als'-clause uses the pluperfect 'had uitgelezen' (the past behind the past). Together they form an unreal past condition.
> aller- superlative intensifier: The prefix 'aller-' on a superlative means 'most ... of all', so 'allerschandelykst' is 'utterly/most scandalous of all' — a flourish typical of Droogstoppel's heated parentheses.

En dit was nog niet alles! Ik vond, om van de verzen niet te spreken--er waren er in velerlei talen--een aantal bundeltjes waaraan het opschrift ontbrak, romancen in het maleisch krygszangen in het javaansch, en wat niet al!  
And this was still not all! I found—not to speak of the verses, of which there were some in all manner of languages—a number of little bundles wanting any heading, romances in Malay, war-songs in Javanese, and what not!
> Two 'er's: existential + quantitative: The first 'er' is the existential/dummy subject ('there were'); the second 'er' is the quantitative 'er' standing in for a counted noun ('some of them'). Dutch routinely stacks these uses of the little word 'er'.
> Relative pronominal adverb 'waaraan': 'Waaraan' ('to/on which') is a relative pronominal adverb replacing 'aan welke', introducing a verb-final relative clause: 'bundles to which the heading was lacking'. Note the diminutive 'bundeltjes' (little bundles).
> om ... te (parenthetical purpose): 'Om ... te spreken' is the om...te construction, here in its set sense 'not to speak of'. 'Om' frames the clause and 'te + infinitive' closes it.

Ook vond ik brieven, waarvan velen in talen die ik niet verstond.  
I also found letters, many of them in languages I did not understand.
> Relative 'waarvan' + verb-final clause: 'Waarvan' ('of which') opens a relative clause; the embedded 'die ik niet verstond' ('which I did not understand') is verb-final, with the simple past 'verstond' at the end.

Sommigen waren aan hem geschreven, of liever het waren slechts afschriften, doch hy scheen daarmee zeker plan te hebben, want alles was door andere personen geteekend voor: gelykluidend met het oorspronkelyke. Dan vond ik nog uittreksels uit dagboeken, aanteekeningen en losse gedachten ... sommigen werkelyk heel los.  
Some were addressed to him, or rather they were only copies, yet he seemed to have some definite purpose with them, for each had been signed by other persons as: in conformity with the original. Then I found, besides, extracts from diaries, jottings, and loose thoughts ... some of them really very loose.
> Passive of state with 'waren ... geschreven': 'Waren geschreven' is a past passive ('were written / had been written to him') built on the participle 'geschreven'. 'Aan hem' marks the indirect object (the addressee — the person to whom the letters were written), not the agent; a Dutch passive agent would be introduced by 'door'.
> te-infinitive after 'schijnen' + 'daarmee': 'Schijnen' (to seem) governs a 'te'-infinitive: 'scheen ... te hebben' (seemed to have). 'Daarmee' ('with them') is a pronominal adverb; 'doch' is the archaic literary 'yet/but'.
> gelykluidend — 'in conformity with': A legal-bureaucratic formula stamped on certified copies: 'gelykluidend met het oorspronkelyke' = 'identical/in conformity with the original'. It signals these were attested transcripts.

Ik had, zooals ik reeds zeide, eenige stukken ter-zy gelegd, omdat ze my toeschenen in myn vak te-pas te komen, en voor myn vak leef ik. Maar ik moet erkennen dat ik met de rest verlegen was.  
I had, as I have already said, set aside a few pieces, because they seemed to me likely to serve my trade, and for my trade I live. But I must confess that I was at a loss with the rest.
> Causal 'omdat' + separable 'toeschijnen': 'Omdat' (because) opens a verb-final clause; 'toeschenen' is the simple past of the separable verb 'toeschijnen' (to seem to someone). It then governs 'te komen' via the te-infinitive.
> te pas komen — to come in useful: An idiom: 'te pas komen' means 'to be of use, to serve a purpose'. For Droogstoppel only the pieces that serve his 'vak' (trade) matter.
> Coordinating 'maar' keeps V2: 'Maar' is a coordinating conjunction: unlike 'omdat', it does NOT send the verb to the end, so the main clause keeps verb-second order ('ik moet erkennen').

Hem het pak terugzenden, kon ik niet, want ik wist niet waar hy woonde. Het was nu eenmaal open.  
Sending the parcel back to him I could not do, for I did not know where he lived. It was open now, once and for all.
> Fronted infinitive phrase forces inversion: The whole non-finite phrase 'Hem het pak terugzenden' (sending the parcel back to him) is fronted, so the finite modal 'kon' stands second and the subject 'ik' inverts after it — strict verb-second. 'Terugzenden' is a separable verb (terug + zenden).
> 'want' coordinates; embedded question is verb-final: 'Want' (for/because) is coordinating and keeps main-clause order, but the indirect question 'waar hy woonde' is itself verb-final, ending in the simple past 'woonde'.

Ik kon niet loochenen dat ik 't had ingezien, en dit zou ik ook niet gedaan hebben, omdat ik zoo van de waarheid houd. Ook gelukte 't me niet het weer zóó te sluiten dat er van 't openen niets blyken kon.  
I could not deny that I had looked into it, and this I would not have done either, since I am so fond of the truth. Nor did I succeed in closing it again in such a way that nothing of the opening could be detected.
> Conditional perfect with fronting: 'Zou ... gedaan hebben' is the conditional perfect ('would not have done'). With 'dit' fronted, 'zou' takes second position and 'ik' inverts.
> Impersonal 'het' + te-infinitive: 'Het gelukte me niet ... te sluiten' uses impersonal 'het' as a dummy subject ('I did not succeed in closing') with the real action carried by the te-infinitive 'te sluiten'.
> Negative 'niets' in a verb-final clause: In this 'dat'-clause the negative word 'niets' (nothing) is the single clause negator, and the modal 'kon' stands at the very end after 'blyken' — verb-final order with no double negation.

Bovendien mag ik niet ontveinzen dat eenige stukken die over koffi handelden, my belang inboezemden, en dat ik gaarne daarvan gebruik maken zou. Ik las dagelyks hier-en-daar eenige bladzyden, en ik kwam hoe langer hoe meer--Frits zegt: "hoe langs zoo meer" maar dit doe ik niet--hoe meer, zeg ik, tot de overtuiging dat men makelaar in koffi moet wezen, om zóó juist te weten te komen wat er in de wereld omgaat.  
Moreover, I will not dissemble that several pieces dealing with coffee aroused my interest, and that I would gladly make use of them. I read a few pages here and there each day, and I came more and more—Frits says: "more and more so," but this I do not do—the more, I say, to the conviction that one must be a coffee broker to learn so exactly what is going on in the world.
> Relative 'die' + separable 'inboezemen': 'Die' (which) opens a verb-final relative clause for the de-word plural 'stukken'. The main verb 'inboezemden' is the past of the separable 'inboezemen' (to inspire/instil), here 'aroused my interest'.
> hoe ... hoe correlative: 'Hoe langer hoe meer' ('the longer, the more') is the Dutch correlative comparative 'hoe ... hoe ...'. Droogstoppel even pauses to scold Frits's variant 'hoe langs zoo meer'.
> Impersonal 'men' + modal 'moet wezen': 'Men' is the impersonal 'one'; the modal 'moet' sends the bare infinitive 'wezen' (archaic for 'zijn', to be) to the end of the 'dat'-clause.

Ik ben overtuigd dat de Rosemeyers, die in suiker doen, nooit zoo-iets onder de oogen hebben gehad.  
I am convinced that the Rosemeyers, who deal in sugar, have never had anything of the kind before their eyes.
> Negative 'nooit' + perfect 'hebben gehad': 'Nooit' (never) is the clause's single negator; the perfect 'hebben gehad' ('have ... had') closes the verb-final relative clause introduced by 'die'.

Nu vreesde ik dat die Sjaalman op-eens weer voor me zou staan, en dat hy me weer iets te zeggen hebben zou.  
Now I feared that this Shawlman might suddenly stand before me again, and that he would again have something to say to me.
> Demonstrative 'die' + conditional 'zou staan': 'Die Sjaalman' uses the demonstrative 'die' ('that') for the de-word, with a faintly dismissive tone. The conditional 'zou staan' ('would stand') sits at the end of the 'dat'-clause.

Het begon me nu te spyten dat ik dien avend de Kapelsteeg was ingegaan, en ik zag in, dat men nooit den fatsoenlyken weg verlaten moet. Natuurlyk had hy my om geld gevraagd, en van zyn pak gesproken.  
I began now to regret that I had turned into the Kapelsteeg that evening, and I saw that one ought never to leave the respectable path. Naturally he would have asked me for money, and spoken of his parcel.
> Impersonal 'het' + pluperfect 'was ingegaan': Impersonal 'het' subjects 'begon te spyten' ('it began to grieve me'). In the 'dat'-clause the pluperfect 'was ingegaan' (had turned in) ends the clause; 'ingaan' is separable.
> 'men' + 'nooit' + modal at clause end: A maxim: 'men' (one) with 'nooit' (never) as the sole negator and the modal 'moet' driven to the end of the 'dat'-clause. 'Den fatsoenlyken weg' keeps the old accusative 'den' and adjective '-en'.

Ik had hem misschien iets gegeven, en als hy my dan den volgenden dag die massa schryvery had toegezonden, ware het myn wettig eigendom geweest.  
I might perhaps have given him something, and if he had then sent me, the next day, that mass of scribbling, it would have been my lawful property.
> Unreal condition: pluperfect + 'ware ... geweest': The 'als'-clause uses the pluperfect 'had toegezonden' ('had sent'); the main clause uses the subjunctive-flavoured 'ware ... geweest' ('would have been'), an archaic conditional form. 'Toezenden' is separable.
> Adverbial accusative 'den ... dag': 'Den volgenden dag' ('the next day') is an adverbial time phrase in the old accusative, with 'den' and adjective '-en'. Such frozen accusatives of time survive into modern fixed expressions.

Ik zou dan de tarwe hebben kunnen scheiden van het kaf, ik had er de nummers uitgehouden, die ik noodig had voor myn boek, en de rest verbrand, of in de papiermand geworpen, hetgeen ik nu niet doen kon.  
I could then have separated the wheat from the chaff, kept out the numbers I needed for my book, and burned the rest, or thrown it into the wastepaper basket, which I now could not do.
> Stacked conditional perfect with modal: 'Zou ... hebben kunnen scheiden' is a conditional perfect with an embedded modal: 'would have been able to separate'. Three verbs cluster at the end — the hallmark of Dutch verb-final stacking.
> 'er' + separable 'uithouden': 'Er ... uit' splits the separable verb 'uithouden' (to keep out), with 'er' standing in for 'out of it (the parcel)'. The participle 'uitgehouden' shows the prefix rejoined.
> Wheat from the chaff: A Biblical idiom (Matthew 3:12) for separating the valuable from the worthless. The pious phrasing is comic in the mouth of the relentlessly mercenary Droogstoppel.

Want als hy terugkwam, zou ik het moeten leveren, en hy, ziende dat ik belang stelde in een paar stukken van zyn hand, zou zeker te veel daarvoor vorderen.  
For if he came back, I should have to hand it over, and he, seeing that I took an interest in a couple of pieces of his, would surely demand too much for them.
> Present participle 'ziende': 'Ziende' is the present participle of 'zien' (the -end(e) form, 'seeing'), used here adverbially to set a circumstance. The main verb is the conditional 'zou ... vorderen' (would demand).
> Conditional 'als' + V2 in main clause: The fronted 'als'-clause ('Want als hy terugkwam') triggers inversion in the main clause: 'zou ik' rather than 'ik zou'. The modal 'moeten' joins 'zou' to send 'leveren' to the end.

Niets geeft den verkooper meer overwicht, dan de ontdekking dat de kooper om zyn waar verlegen is.  
Nothing gives the seller more of an advantage than the discovery that the buyer is hard pressed for his wares.
> Negative subject 'Niets' + dative 'den verkooper': 'Niets' (nothing) is the single negative and the subject. 'Den verkooper' is the indirect object in the old masculine dative form (to the seller), where modern Dutch would use 'de verkoper'.
> verlegen om — hard pressed for: 'Verlegen zyn om iets' means to be in want of, hard pressed for, something (here 'zyn waar', his wares). It is a different sense from 'verlegen' meaning merely 'shy/embarrassed'.

Zulk een pozitie wordt dan ook door een koopman die zyn vak verstaat, zooveel mogelyk vermeden. Een ander denkbeeld--ik sprak er reeds van--dat bewyzen moge hoe ontvankelyk het bezoeken van de beurs iemand laten kan voor menschlievende indrukken, was dit.  
Such a position is therefore avoided as far as possible by a merchant who understands his trade. Another idea—I have already spoken of it—which may prove how susceptible a visit to the Exchange can leave a man to humane impressions, was this.
> Worden-passive with door-agent: 'Wordt ... vermeden' is the process passive ('is avoided'), and the agent is marked with 'door' ('by a merchant'). The participle 'vermeden' lands at the end.
> Causative/permissive 'laten' + bare infinitive: 'Laten kan' here means 'can leave/make' someone receptive — 'laten' takes a bare infinitive and behaves like a causative. 'Het bezoeken' is again a substantivized infinitive.

Bastiaans--dit is de derde bediende die zoo oud en stuntelig wordt--was den laatsten tyd, van de dertig dagen zeker geen vyf-en-twintig binnen geweest, en àls hy aan 't kantoor komt, doet hy nog dikwyls zyn werk slecht.  
Bastiaans—this is the third clerk, who is growing so old and feeble—had of late, out of thirty days, certainly not been in for twenty-five, and when he does come to the office, he often does his work badly besides.
> Relative 'die' for a person: 'Die' opens a verb-final relative clause describing the clerk Bastiaans ('who is growing so old and feeble'), with the present 'wordt' at the end.
> Fronted 'als'-clause → inversion: When the conditional 'àls'-clause comes first, the main clause inverts: finite verb 'doet' second, subject 'hy' after it. This verb-second discipline holds however heavy the front element.
> Pluperfect with 'zijn': 'Was ... geweest' is the pluperfect of 'zijn' ('had been'); the separable-feeling 'binnen' precedes the participle. State and motion verbs take 'zijn', not 'hebben', as their perfect auxiliary.

Als eerlyk man ben ik tegenover de firma--Last & Co, sedert de Meyers er uit zyn--verplicht te zorgen dat ieder zyn werk doe, en ik mag niet uit verkeerd begrepen medelyden of overgevoeligheid, het geld van de firma wegwerpen. Zóó is myn principe.  
As an honest man I am bound to the firm—Last & Co, since the Meyers are out of it—to see that everyone does his work, and I may not, out of misplaced compassion or oversensitivity, throw away the firm's money. Such is my principle.
> te-infinitive + subjunctive 'doe': 'Verplicht ... te zorgen' governs a te-infinitive ('bound to see to'); the dependent clause uses the archaic present subjunctive 'doe' ('that everyone do his work') rather than indicative 'doet'.
> Modal 'mag' + separable 'wegwerpen': The modal 'mag' (may) sends the separable infinitive 'wegwerpen' (to throw away) to the end. 'Niet' negates the whole verb, the typical placement for 'niet' over a definite object.

Ik geef liever dien Bastiaans uit myn eigen zak een driegulden, dan dat ik voortga hem de zevenhonderd gulden 's jaars uittebetalen die hy niet meer verdient.  
I would sooner give that Bastiaans three guilders out of my own pocket than go on paying him the seven hundred guilders a year that he no longer earns.
> Comparative 'liever ... dan': 'Liever ... dan' ('rather ... than') is the comparative of preference. The second member 'dan dat ik voortga' opens a clause with the separable 'voortgaan' governing the joined te-infinitive 'uittebetalen' (the 1860 spelling glues 'uit te betalen').
> 's jaars — genitive of time: ''s jaars' is a frozen genitive ('of the year', i.e. per year/annually), contracting 'des jaars'. The same -s genitive survives in ''s morgens', ''s avonds'. The gulden (guilder) was the Dutch currency.

Ik heb uitgerekend dat die man sedert vier-en-dertig jaren, aan inkomen--zoo van Last & Co, als vroeger van Last & Meyer, maar de Meyers zyn er uit--de som van byna vyftien duizend gulden genoten heeft, en dit is voor een burgerman een aardig sommetje.  
I have reckoned that this man, over the past thirty-four years, has drawn in income—whether from Last & Co or formerly from Last & Meyer, but the Meyers are out of it—the sum of nearly fifteen thousand guilders, and for a man of his station that is a tidy little sum.
> Compound number + period plural 'jaren': 'Vier-en-dertig' ('four-and-thirty', 34) shows the Dutch unit-before-ten counting order. 'Jaren' is the older plural of 'jaar', kept after a number where modern Dutch often uses the singular 'jaar'.
> Perfect 'heeft genoten' at clause end: 'Heeft genoten' (has drawn/enjoyed) is the perfect of the strong verb 'genieten'; in this 'dat'-clause it closes the clause after a long stretch of inserted material.
> Diminutive 'sommetje': 'Sommetje' is the diminutive of 'som' (sum), here ironically affectionate: 'a tidy little sum'. The -tje suffix can connote dearness or, as often in Droogstoppel, smug satisfaction.

Er zyn er weinig in dien stand, die zooveel bezitten. Recht tot klagen heeft hy dus niet.  
Few in his station possess so much. He has, then, no right to complain.
> Double 'er' + dative 'dien stand': The first 'er' is existential ('there are'), the second quantitative ('few of them'). 'In dien stand' keeps the old masculine dative 'dien' ('in that station/class').
> Fronting for emphasis + V2: The object 'Recht tot klagen' is fronted for emphasis, so 'heeft' stands second and 'hy' inverts. 'Dus' here is the coordinating 'therefore', and 'niet' negates the whole.

Ik ben op deze berekening gekomen door dat stuk van Sjaalman over de multiplikatie. Die Sjaalman schryft een goede hand, dacht ik.  
I arrived at this calculation through that piece of Shawlman's on multiplication. That Shawlman writes a good hand, thought I.
> Perfect with 'zijn': 'ben ... gekomen': 'Komen' (to come), a verb of motion, forms its perfect with 'zijn', not 'hebben': 'ik ben ... gekomen'. 'Deze berekening' uses the near demonstrative 'deze' for a de-word.
> een goede hand schrijven: Idiom: 'een goede hand schryven' = to write a good (legible) hand. Droogstoppel admires Sjaalman's penmanship while remaining indifferent to the ideas it carries.

Bovendien, hy zag er armoedig uit, en wist niet hoe laat het was ... hoe zou 't wezen, dacht ik, als ik hem de plaats van Bastiaans gaf?  
Besides, he looked shabby, and did not know what time it was ... how would it be, thought I, if I gave him Bastiaans's place?
> Impersonal 'het' in 'hoe laat het was': 'Hoe laat is het?' ('what time is it?') uses dummy 'het' as in time and weather expressions. In this indirect question the verb 'was' moves to the end: 'hoe laat het was'.
> Conditional 'zou' + simple-past condition: 'Hoe zou 't wezen' is the conditional ('how would it be'); the 'als'-clause uses the simple past 'gaf' (strong past of 'geven') to frame a hypothetical present condition.

Ik zou hem in dat geval zeggen dat hy my "m'nheer" moest noemen, maar dit zou hyzelf wel begrypen, want een bediende kan toch zyn patroon niet by den naam aanspreken, en hy ware misschien voor zyn leven geholpen.  
In that case I would tell him that he must call me "sir," but this he would understand of his own accord, for a clerk cannot, after all, address his employer by name, and he would perhaps be provided for the rest of his life.
> Modal 'moest' to the end: In this 'dat'-clause the modal 'moest' (had to) drives the bare infinitive 'noemen' to the clause-final cluster: 'moest noemen' ('must call me sir').
> Separable 'aanspreken' + negation: The modal 'kan' sends the separable infinitive 'aanspreken' (to address) to the end; 'niet' negates the act. 'By den naam' again preserves the dative 'den'.
> Emphatic reflexive 'hyzelf': 'Hyzelf' joins the pronoun 'hy' (1860 for 'hij') with 'zelf' for emphasis ('he himself'). It is an intensifier, distinct from the reflexive 'zich'.

Hy zou kunnen beginnen met vier- of vyfhonderd gulden--onze Bastiaans heeft ook lang gewerkt voor hy tot zevenhonderd opklom--en ik had een goede daad gedaan.  
He might begin at four or five hundred guilders—our Bastiaans, too, worked a long while before he rose to seven hundred—and I should have done a good deed.
> Separable 'opklimmen' in a 'voor'-clause: 'Voor' (here 'before') opens a verb-final clause ending in 'opklom', the strong past of the separable 'opklimmen' (to rise/climb up to a figure).
> Pluperfect 'had ... gedaan': 'Had ... gedaan' is the pluperfect of 'doen' ('had done'), here in a hypothetical sense ('I should have done a good deed'). The participle 'gedaan' closes the clause.

Ja, met driehonderd gulden zou hy wel kunnen beginnen, want daar hy nooit in zaken geweest is, zou hy de eerste jaren als leertyd kunnen beschouwen, wat dan ook billyk is, want hy kan zich niet gelyk-stellen met menschen die veel gewerkt hebben.  
Yes, with three hundred guilders he might well begin, for since he has never been in business, he could regard the first years as an apprenticeship, which is only fair too, for he cannot put himself on a level with people who have worked a great deal.
> Causal 'daar' + perfect 'is geweest': 'Daar' here is the archaic/literary causal conjunction 'since/because', opening a verb-final clause. 'Geweest is' is the perfect of 'zijn', with 'nooit' as the lone negator.
> Conditional + modal verb cluster: 'Zou ... kunnen beschouwen' stacks the conditional 'zou' with modal 'kunnen' and the infinitive 'beschouwen' ('could regard') at the clause end — three verbs in sequence.
> Reflexive 'zich' with 'gelyk-stellen': 'Zich gelyk-stellen' (to put oneself on a level) uses the 3rd-person reflexive 'zich'. The separable 'gelyk-stellen' and 'zich' both sit in the middle field before the verb.

Ik ben zeker dat hy met tweehonderd gulden tevreden zou zyn.  
I am sure he would be content with two hundred guilders.
> Conditional 'zou zyn' at clause end: In this 'dat'-clause the conditional 'zou zyn' ('would be') closes the clause after the predicate 'tevreden'. Droogstoppel's escalating self-serving downward bidding is the joke.

Maar ik was niet gerust over zyn gedrag ... hy had een sjaal om. En bovendien, ik wist niet waar hy woonde.  
But I was not easy about his conduct ... he wore a shawl. And besides, I did not know where he lived.
> Possessive 'zyn' (period spelling): 'Zyn' is the 1860 spelling of the possessive 'zijn' ('his'), with y for ij. The phrase 'niet gerust over' means 'not easy/comfortable about'.
> een sjaal om hebben — the Shawlman motif: The throwaway 'hy had een sjaal om' (he wore a shawl) is the running detail that earns the man his nickname 'Sjaalman' (Shawlman/Scarfman). 'Om hebben' = to have on/be wearing.

Een paar dagen daarna, waren de jonge Stern en Frits te zamen op een boekverkooping geweest in het Wapen van Bern.  
A few days afterwards, young Stern and Frits had been together at a book auction in the Wapen van Bern.
> Pluperfect with 'zijn': 'Waren ... geweest' is the pluperfect of 'zijn' ('had been'); 'te zamen' (modern 'tezamen/samen') means 'together'. The participle 'geweest' closes the clause.

Ik had Frits verboden iets te koopen, maar Stern, die ruim zakgeld heeft, kwam met eenige prullen t'huis. Dit is zyn zaak.  
I had forbidden Frits to buy anything, but Stern, who has plenty of pocket money, came home with a few trifles. That is his affair.
> Pluperfect + te-infinitive complement: 'Had ... verboden' is the pluperfect of 'verbieden' (to forbid), which governs the te-infinitive 'te koopen' ('to buy'). The participle 'verboden' precedes its infinitive complement.
> Relative 'die' + separable 't'huis komen': 'Die' opens a verb-final relative clause ('who has plenty of pocket money'). 'Kwam ... t'huis' separates 't'huis' (modern 'thuis') to the end, as a separable directional element.

Doch zie, daar vertelde Frits dat hy Sjaalman gezien had, die by de verkooping geëmploieerd scheen. Hy had de boeken uit de kasten genomen, en die op de lange tafel voortgeschoven naar den afslager.  
But behold, Frits then related that he had seen Shawlman, who appeared to be employed at the auction. He had been taking the books out of the cases and pushing them down the long table toward the auctioneer.
> Archaic 'doch' + inversion after 'daar': 'Doch' is the literary/archaic 'but/yet'. The fronted adverb 'daar' triggers verb-second inversion: 'vertelde Frits' rather than 'Frits vertelde'.
> Relative 'die' + 'schijnen' + participle: 'Die ... scheen' is a verb-final relative clause ('who seemed'); 'geëmploieerd' is the past participle (a Frenchified 'employed') in a passive-like state. Note the period spelling of the loanword.
> Pluperfect of separable 'voortschuiven': 'Had ... voortgeschoven' is the pluperfect ('had pushed forward') of the separable 'voortschuiven'; the prefix 'voort-' rejoins the participle 'geschoven' as 'voortgeschoven'.

Frits zei dat hy zeer bleek zag, en dat een heer die daar het opzicht scheen te hebben, hem bekeven had, omdat hy een paar jaargangen van de Aglaia had laten vallen, wat ik dan ook zeer onhandig vind, want dit is een allerliefste verzameling van dames handwerken. Marie heeft het samen met de Rosemeyers, die in suiker doen.  
Frits said that he looked very pale, and that a gentleman who seemed to have charge there had scolded him, because he had let a couple of volumes of the Aglaia fall, which I also think very clumsy, for it is a most delightful collection of ladies' handiwork. Marie has it together with the Rosemeyers, who deal in sugar.
> Nested relative + 'schijnen te' + pluperfect: Inside the relative clause 'schijnen' takes a te-infinitive ('scheen te hebben'); the main verb 'bekeven had' is the pluperfect of the strong 'bekijven' (to scold). Multiple verb-final clauses nest here.
> Causal 'omdat' + 'laten' + bare infinitive: 'Omdat' opens a verb-final clause; 'had laten vallen' (had let fall/dropped) shows causative/permissive 'laten' taking a bare infinitive 'vallen', with the whole cluster at the end.

Ze knoopt er uit ... uit de Aglaia meen ik. Maar onder dat kyven had Frits gehoord dat hy vyftien stuivers daags verdiende.  
She copies patterns out of it ... out of the Aglaia, I mean. But amid that scolding Frits had heard that he earned fifteen stivers a day.
> 'er ... uit' then a full PP: 'Knoopt er uit' uses 'er' to stand in for 'uit de Aglaia', then Droogstoppel restates the full prepositional phrase for clarity. 'Eruit knopen' here = to copy/work patterns out of it.
> Fronted PP + pluperfect inversion: The fronted phrase 'onder dat kyven' ('amid that scolding') forces inversion: the pluperfect auxiliary 'had' stands second, 'Frits' after it, and the participle 'gehoord' closes the clause.
> stuiver — a small coin: A stuiver was a five-cent coin (twenty to the guilder). 'Vyftien stuivers daags' ('fifteen stivers a day') is a meagre wage, which Droogstoppel coolly annualizes.

"Denk je dat ik van plan ben vyftien stuivers daags aan jou weg te gooien?" had die heer gezegd.  
"Do you think I mean to throw away fifteen stivers a day on you?" the gentleman had said.
> te-infinitive after 'van plan zijn': 'Van plan zyn' (to intend) governs a te-infinitive: 'van plan ben ... weg te gooien' (intend to throw away). 'Weggooien' is separable, so 'te' inserts between prefix and verb: 'weg te gooien'.
> Pronoun 'je' vs reported 'had ... gezegd': The quoted speech uses informal 'je' ('do you think'); the narration frames it with the pluperfect 'had ... gezegd' (had said). 'Je' is the everyday 'you', beside the literary 'gy/ge' elsewhere.

Ik rekende uit, dat vyftien stuivers daags--ik denk dat de zon-en feestdagen niet meetellen, anders had hy een maand of jaargeld genoemd--tweehonderd vyf-en-twintig gulden 's jaars uitmaken.  
I reckoned out that fifteen stivers a day—I suppose the Sundays and holidays do not count, otherwise he would have named a monthly or yearly wage—come to two hundred and twenty-five guilders a year.
> Separable 'meetellen' in a 'dat'-clause: 'Meetellen' (to count along, to be counted in) is separable but stays joined in the verb-final position of the 'dat'-clause: 'niet meetellen' ('do not count'), with 'niet' as negator.
> Fronted 'anders' + pluperfect inversion: 'Anders' ('otherwise') is fronted, inverting to 'had hy ... genoemd' (would have named), a counterfactual pluperfect. 'Maand- of jaargeld' shows compound-shortening with a hanging hyphen.

Ik ben snel in myn besluiten--als men zoo lang in zaken is, weet men altyd terstond wat men te doen heeft--en den volgenden morgen vroeg was ik by Gaafzuiger. Zoo heet de boekhandelaar die de verkooping gehouden had.  
I am quick in my decisions—when one has been in business so long, one always knows at once what one has to do—and early the next morning I was at Gaafzuiger's. That is the name of the bookseller who had held the auction.
> Impersonal 'men' + fronted 'als'-clause: The fronted 'als'-clause inverts the main clause to 'weet men'. 'Men' (one) recurs three times; the final 'wat men te doen heeft' is a verb-final indirect question with the te-construction 'te doen heeft'.
> Inversion after fronted time phrase: After 'den volgenden morgen vroeg' (early the next morning), the verb 'was' stands second and 'ik' inverts. 'By Gaafzuiger' uses 'by' (= bij) with a name to mean 'at Gaafzuiger's'.

Ik vroeg naar den man die de Aglaia had laten vallen. --Die heeft zyn congé, zei Gaafzuiger.  
I asked after the man who had let the Aglaia fall. —He has had his dismissal, said Gaafzuiger.
> Dative 'den man' + relative + 'laten vallen': 'Naar den man' keeps the old dative 'den'. The relative clause ends in 'had laten vallen' ('had dropped'), with causative 'laten' + bare infinitive 'vallen' in the verb-final cluster.
> congé — dismissal: 'Congé' (French loanword) means leave or dismissal; 'zyn congé hebben' = to have been given the sack. Gaafzuiger reports Sjaalman has already been fired.

Hy was lui, pedant en ziekelyk. Ik kocht een doosjen ouwels, en besloot terstond het met onzen Bastiaans nog wat aantezien.  
He was lazy, pedantic, and sickly. I bought a little box of wafers, and resolved at once to look a while longer at our Bastiaans.
> Diminutive 'doosjen': 'Doosjen' is the 1860 spelling of the diminutive 'doosje' (little box), from 'doos'. Diminutives are always neuter het-words. 'Ouwels' are wafers (for sealing letters).
> te-infinitive of separable 'aanzien': 'Besluiten' governs a te-infinitive; 'aantezien' is the 1860 joined spelling of 'aan te zien' (to look at a while longer / give more time), with 'te' inside the separable verb.

Ik kon er niet toe besluiten, een oud man zoo op-straat te zetten.  
I could not bring myself to put an old man out into the street like that.
> 'er ... toe' + te-infinitive: 'Er ... toe besluiten' uses the pronominal 'er ... toe' ('bring oneself to it'); 'toe' is the prepositional element split from 'er'. The action follows as a te-infinitive 'op-straat te zetten'.

Streng, maar, waar het wezen kan, zachtmoedig, is altyd myn principe geweest.  
Strict, but, where it can be so, gentle—that has always been my principle.
> Verb-final relative 'waar ... kan': 'Waar het wezen kan' ('where it can be so') is a verb-final clause with the modal 'kan' at the end and archaic 'wezen' for 'zijn'. The aphorism's chiastic form is Droogstoppel's pet 'principe'.
> Perfect 'is geweest' with fronted predicate: The predicate 'Streng, maar ... zachtmoedig' is fronted, so 'is' stands second and the participle 'geweest' closes the perfect ('has always been my principle').

Ik verzuim echter nooit, iets te vernemen wat te-pas kan komen in de zaken, en daarom vroeg ik aan Gaafzuiger waar die Sjaalman woonde? Hy gaf my 't adres, en ik schreef het op.  
I never neglect, however, to find out anything that may come in useful in business, and so I asked Gaafzuiger where that Shawlman lived. He gave me the address, and I wrote it down.
> 'nooit' negation + te-infinitive: 'Nooit' (never) is the single negator with present 'verzuim'; 'te vernemen' is the te-infinitive object. The trailing 'wat ... kan komen' is a free relative ('anything that may be useful').
> Indirect question 'waar ... woonde': 'Waar die Sjaalman woonde' is a verb-final indirect question ending in the simple past 'woonde'. 'Die Sjaalman' carries the dismissive demonstrative 'die'.

Ik peinsde gedurig over myn boek, maar daar ik van waarheid houd, moet ik ronduit zeggen dat ik niet wist, hoe ik 't daarmee zou aanleggen. Eén ding staat vast: de bouwstoffen die ik in Sjaalman's pak gevonden had, waren belangryk voor de makelaars in koffi.  
I brooded continually over my book, but since I am fond of the truth, I must say outright that I did not know how I should go about it. One thing is certain: the materials I had found in Shawlman's parcel were of importance to the coffee brokers.
> Causal 'daar' + fixed 'houden van': 'Daar' is the literary causal 'since'; it sends 'houd' to the end of the clause. 'Houden van' (to be fond of) is a fixed verb-preposition pair, not matching English word for word.
> 'daarmee' + conditional + separable 'aanleggen': 'Daarmee' ('with it') is a pronominal adverb; 'zou aanleggen' is the conditional of the separable 'aanleggen' ('how I should go about it'), with the cluster at the end of the indirect question.

De vraag was maar, hoe ik handelen moest om die bouwstoffen behoorlyk te schiften en by-een te brengen. Ieder makelaar weet van hoeveel gewicht een goede sorteering der kavelingen is.  
The only question was how I should set about sorting those materials properly and bringing them together. Every broker knows of what weight a good sorting of the lots is.
> om ... te (purpose) with two infinitives: 'Om ... te schiften en by-een te brengen' is a purpose clause ('in order to sort and bring together'). 'By-een brengen' (modern 'bijeenbrengen') is separable, taking 'te' as 'by-een te brengen'.
> Embedded clause + genitive 'der kavelingen': The complement 'van hoeveel gewicht ... is' is verb-final ('of what weight ... is'). 'Der kavelingen' is a genitive plural ('of the lots'), preserved as a frozen case form.

Maar ... schryven--buiten de korrespondentie met de principalen--ligt zoo niet in myn kring, en toch voelde ik dat ik schryven moest, omdat misschien de toekomst van 't vak er van afhangt.  
But ... writing—apart from the correspondence with our principals—does not exactly lie within my sphere, and yet I felt that I had to write, because the future of the trade may perhaps depend on it.
> 'niet' with adverb 'zoo': 'Ligt zoo niet in myn kring' ('does not exactly lie within my sphere') uses 'niet' to negate the verb, softened by 'zoo'. 'Kring' (circle/sphere) is Droogstoppel's domain of competence.
> Causal clause + 'er van afhangt': 'Omdat' opens a verb-final causal clause; 'er van afhangt' splits the separable 'afhangen' (to depend) with the pronominal 'er van' ('on it'). The verb 'afhangt' lands last.

De inlichtingen die ik in de bundels van Sjaalman vond, zyn niet van dien aard, dat Last & Co het nut daarvan voor zich alleen kunnen houden.  
The information I found in Shawlman's bundles is not of such a kind that Last & Co could keep the benefit of it to themselves alone.
> Dative 'dien aard' + result clause: 'Van dien aard' keeps the old dative 'dien' ('of such a kind'). The 'dat'-clause is verb-final, with the modal cluster 'kunnen houden' ('could keep') at the end.

Als dit zoo ware, begrypt ieder dat ik niet de moeite zou nemen een boek te laten drukken dat Busselinck & Waterman ook te lezen krygen, want wie een konkurrent op den weg helpt, is een gek.  
Were this so, everyone understands that I would not take the trouble to have a book printed that Busselinck & Waterman would also get to read, for whoever helps a competitor along the way is a fool.
> Subjunctive 'ware' for 'were': 'Ware' is the past subjunctive of 'zijn' ('were'), an archaic conditional form used here in a contrary-to-fact 'als'-clause: 'were this so'. Modern Dutch would write 'was'.
> Free relative 'wie' + dative 'den weg': 'Wie' here is the headless relative 'whoever'; the clause 'wie ... helpt' is its own verb-final unit, resumed by 'is een gek'. 'Op den weg' keeps the dative 'den'. 'Iemand op weg helpen' = to help someone along.

Dit is een vast principe van me. Neen, ik zag in dat er een gevaar dreigt, dat de heele koffimarkt bederven zou, een gevaar dat alleen door de vereende krachten van alle makelaars kan worden afgeweerd, en zelfs is 't mogelyk dat deze krachten daartoe niet eens voldoende zyn, en dat ook de suikerraffinadeurs--Frits zegt: raffineurs, maar ik schryf nadeurs.  
This is a fixed principle of mine. No, I saw that a danger threatens which would ruin the whole coffee market, a danger that can be warded off only by the united efforts of all the brokers, and it is even possible that these efforts are not in themselves sufficient, and that the sugar refiners too—Frits says: raffineurs, but I write nadeurs.
> Modal + worden-passive: 'kan worden afgeweerd': 'Kan worden afgeweerd' is a modal over a process passive ('can be warded off'), with the agent in 'door de vereende krachten'. The separable 'afweren' supplies the participle 'afgeweerd'.

Dit doen de Rosemeyers ook, en die doen in suiker.  
The Rosemeyers do this too, and they deal in sugar.
> Fronted object 'Dit' + inversion: The object 'Dit' is fronted, so the verb 'doen' stands second and the subject 'de Rosemeyers' follows — verb-second order. The clause replays the Rosemeyer/'in suiker' running joke.

Ik weet wel dat men zegt: geraffineerde schelm, en niet: geraffinadeerde schelm, maar dit is omdat ieder die met schelmen te doen heeft, zich zoo kort mogelyk van de zaak afhelpt--dat ook de raffinadeurs dan, en de handelaren in indigo er by noodig zullen wezen.  
I know well that people say: a refined rogue, and not: a refinaded rogue, but this is because everyone who has dealings with rogues gets the matter over as briefly as possible—that the refiners then, and the dealers in indigo, will be needed in it as well.
> Reflexive 'zich' + 'afhelpen': 'Zich ... afhelpt' is reflexive ('gets the matter over with'), using 3rd-person 'zich'. Inside, 'die ... te doen heeft' is a verb-final relative clause with the te-construction 'te doen heeft'.
> geraffineerd — refined / cunning: Droogstoppel's pun: 'geraffineerd' means both 'refined' (of sugar) and 'cunning/crafty' (of a rogue). His mangling 'geraffinadeerde' is part of his comic war with words.

Als ik zoo al schryvende nadenk, komt het me voor, dat zelfs de scheepsreederyen er eenigszins in betrokken zyn, en de koopvaardyvloot ... zeker, dit is waar!  
As I go on writing and reflecting like this, it occurs to me that even the shipping firms are to some extent involved in it, and the merchant fleet ... certainly, this is true!
> Present participle 'schryvende': 'Schryvende' is the present participle (-end(e) form) of 'schryven', used adverbially: 'while writing'. It pairs with 'nadenk' (reflect) to picture the act in progress.
> Impersonal 'het komt me voor' + 'er ... in': 'Het komt me voor' ('it occurs to me') uses impersonal 'het' with the separable 'voorkomen'. The 'dat'-clause closes with 'er ... in betrokken zyn', the pronominal 'er in' ('involved in it').

En de zeilenmakers ook, en de minister van finantien, en de armbesturen, en de andere ministers, en de pasteibakkers, en de galanteriekramers, en de vrouwen, en de scheepsbouwmeesters, en de groothandelaars, en die in 't klein verkoopen, en de huisbewaarders, en de tuinluî.  
And the sailmakers too, and the minister of finance, and the boards of poor relief, and the other ministers, and the pastry-cooks, and the dealers in fancy goods, and the women, and the shipwrights, and the wholesalers, and those who sell retail, and the house-keepers, and the gardeners.
> Plural in -s vs -en (and 'luî'): This avalanche of trades shows plural formation: -s after -er ('zeilenmakers', 'pasteibakkers') and -en elsewhere ('vrouwen'). 'Tuinluî' (modern 'tuinlui', gardeners) uses the irregular collective plural '-lui/-lieden'.

En--zonderling toch, hoe de gedachten onder 't schryven in iemand opkomen --myn boek gaat ook de molenaars aan, en de dominees, en hen die Holloway- pillen verkoopen, en de likeurstokers, en de pannenbakkers, en de menschen die van staatsschuld leven, en de pompenmakers, en de touwslagers, en de wevers, en de slachters, en de klerken op een makelaarskantoor, en de aandeelhouders van de Nederlandsche Handelmaatschappy, en eigenlyk, wel beschouwd, alle anderen ook.  
And—how strange, after all, the way thoughts come into one while writing—my book concerns the millers too, and the clergymen, and those who sell Holloway's pills, and the liqueur distillers, and the tile-bakers, and the people who live on the national debt, and the pump-makers, and the rope-makers, and the weavers, and the butchers, and the clerks in a broker's office, and the shareholders of the Dutch Trading Company, and indeed, all things considered, all others as well.
> Separable 'opkomen' in an exclamatory clause: 'Opkomen' (to arise, occur) is separable; in this verb-final clause it stays joined as 'opkomen' at the end ('how thoughts come into one'). ''t Schryven' is a substantivized infinitive.
> Object pronoun 'hen' + relative 'die': 'Hen' is the object form of 'zij' (them), here antecedent to the relative 'die ... verkoopen' ('those who sell'). The relative clause is verb-final.

En den koning ook ... ja, den Koning vooral! Myn boek moet de wereld in.  
And the king too ... yes, the King above all! My book must go out into the world.
> Accusative 'den' on 'koning': 'Den koning' keeps the old masculine accusative 'den' for 'the king' as object. Multatuli's escalation to 'den Koning vooral!' winks at the colonial monarch whose system the book indicts.
> Directional with elided verb of motion: 'Moet de wereld in' ('must go out into the world') is a modal with the directional 'de wereld in', the verb of motion ('gaan') left understood — a compact, idiomatic Dutch pattern.

Hiertegen is niets te doen!  
There is nothing to be done against this!
> Pronominal 'hiertegen' + 'er is ... te doen': 'Hiertegen' ('against this') is a 'hier-' pronominal adverb. 'Is niets te doen' is the passive-flavoured 'there is nothing to be done' construction with a te-infinitive and the negative 'niets'.

Laat dan Busselinck & Waterman het ook te lezen krygen ... afgunst is myn zaak niet.  
Then let Busselinck & Waterman get to read it too ... envy is no affair of mine.
> Imperative 'Laat' + causative: 'Laat ... krygen' is an imperative of 'laten' used causatively ('then let them get to read it'), here a concessive 'let them'. The imperative bare stem 'Laat' opens the clause.

Maar knoeiers en onderkruipers zyn ze, dit zeg ik!  
But bunglers and underminers they are, this I do say!
> Fronted predicate + V2 + 'ze': The predicate nouns 'knoeiers en onderkruipers' are fronted for emphasis, so 'zyn' stands second and the subject 'ze' (they) inverts after it.

Ik heb 't vandaag nog aan den jongen Stern gezegd, toen ik hem in Artis introduceerde.  
I said as much again today to young Stern, when I introduced him at Artis.
> Temporal 'toen' + verb-final: 'Toen' (when, for a single past event) opens a verb-final clause; the simple past 'introduceerde' lands at the end. 'Toen' is reserved for the past, unlike present/future 'als/wanneer'.

Hy mag 't gerust schryven aan zyn vader.  
He is quite free to write it to his father.
> Modal 'mag' (permission): 'Mag' expresses permission ('he is quite free to / may'); the modal sends the infinitive 'schryven' to the end. 'Gerust' here is an adverb meaning 'safely, with my blessing'.

Zoo zat ik dan voor een paar dagen nog vreeselyk in den brand met myn boek, en zie, Frits heeft my op den weg geholpen.  
So, a few days ago, I was still in a dreadful fix over my book, and behold, Frits has helped me along the way.
> Fronted 'Zoo' + inversion; dative 'den brand': 'Zoo' fronted inverts to 'zat ik'. 'In den brand zitten' (idiom: to be in a fix/jam) keeps the dative 'den brand'. The y-spelling 'vreeselyk' is the 1860 'vreselijk'.
> Perfect 'heeft ... geholpen': 'Heeft ... geholpen' is the perfect of the strong 'helpen' (participle 'geholpen'). 'Iemand op weg helpen' = to help someone on their way; 'den weg' again shows the dative.

Ik heb dit hemzelf niet gezegd, omdat ik niet goed vind, iemand te laten merken dat men verplichting aan hem heeft--dit is een principe van me--maar wáár is het.  
I have not told him so myself, because I do not think it well to let anyone notice that one is under an obligation to him—this is a principle of mine—but true it is.
> 'laten merken' + te-infinitive: 'Te laten merken' chains causative 'laten' with the bare infinitive 'merken' inside a te-infinitive complement ('to let anyone notice'). The whole sits under the causal 'omdat'.
> Impersonal 'men' in verb-final clause: 'Men' (one) subjects this 'dat'-clause; the verb 'heeft' moves to the end ('that one is under an obligation to him'). 'Verplichting aan iemand hebben' = to be indebted to someone.

Hy zei dat Stern zoo'n knappe jongen was, dat hy zulke snelle vorderingen in de taal maakte, en dat hy duitsche verzen van Sjaalman in 't hollandsch vertaald had.  
He said that Stern was such a clever lad, that he was making such rapid progress in the language, and that he had translated some German verses of Shawlman's into Dutch.
> Reported speech: simple past in 'dat'-clauses: The chain of 'dat'-clauses ('dat Stern ... was', 'dat hy ... maakte', 'dat hy ... vertaald had') reports Frits's speech, each verb pushed to the end. 'Zulke' is the archaic-flavoured 'such'.
> Pluperfect 'vertaald had': 'Vertaald had' is the pluperfect of 'vertalen' (to translate). Note lowercase 'duitsche'/'hollandsch' for language adjectives, in the 1860 -sch spelling.

Ge ziet, de verkeerde wereld was in myn huis: de Hollander had in 't duitsch geschreven, en de Duitscher vertaalde in 't hollandsch. Als ieder zich by zyn eigen taal had gehouden, zou er moeite gespaard zyn.  
You see, the world was topsy-turvy in my house: the Dutchman had written in German, and the German was translating into Dutch. If each had kept to his own language, the trouble would have been spared.
> Literary pronoun 'ge': 'Ge' is the literary/period second-person pronoun ('you'), the unstressed form of 'gij'. Droogstoppel addresses the reader directly in this elevated register, typical of 1860 prose.
> Reflexive condition + conditional passive: The 'als'-clause uses reflexive 'zich ... had gehouden' ('had kept to'). The main clause 'zou ... gespaard zyn' is a conditional passive ('would have been spared'), with existential 'er'.

Maar, dacht ik, als ik myn boek door dien Stern schryven liet? Als ik er wat by te voegen heb, schryf ikzelf van-tyd tot-tyd een hoofdstuk.  
But, thought I, what if I let that Stern write my book? If I have anything to add, I will write a chapter myself from time to time.
> Causative 'laten' + 'door'-agent: 'Schryven liet' (had written) is causative 'laten' with a bare infinitive; the agent is marked with 'door dien Stern' ('by that Stern'). 'Dien' is the old accusative of the demonstrative 'die'.
> Conditional 'als'-clause front → inversion: After the fronted 'Als ik er wat by te voegen heb', the main clause inverts: 'schryf ikzelf'. 'Ikzelf' is the emphatic 'I myself'.

Frits kan ook helpen.  
Frits can help too.

Hy heeft een lystje van woorden die met twee e's geschreven worden, en Marie kan alles in 't net schryven.  
He has a little list of words that are written with two e's, and Marie can copy everything out fair.
> Diminutive 'lystje' + relative worden-passive: 'Lystje' is the diminutive of 'lyst' (little list). The relative clause 'die ... geschreven worden' is a process passive ('that are written with two e's') — Frits's spelling crusade.

Dit is met-één voor den lezer een waarborg tegen alle onzedelykheid.  
This is, at one stroke, a guarantee to the reader against all immorality.
> Dative 'den lezer': 'Voor den lezer' ('for the reader') keeps the masculine dative 'den'. 'Met-één' (modern 'meteen') here means 'at one stroke, at the same time'.

Want dit begrypt ge toch, dat een fatsoenlyk makelaar aan zyn dochter niets in handen geven zal, wat niet strookt met zeden en fatsoen.  
For you do understand this, that a respectable broker will put nothing into his daughter's hands that does not square with morals and decency.
> Fronting + literary 'ge': 'Dit' is fronted, inverting to 'begrypt ge'. 'Ge' is again the period second-person pronoun; 'toch' is a softening modal particle ('after all, surely').
> Free relative 'wat' + negation: 'Wat' is the headless relative for things ('that which / anything that'); the clause is verb-final with 'niet' negating 'strookt met' ('does not square with'). 'Strooken met' is a fixed verb-preposition pair.

Ik heb toen de beide jongens over myn plan gesproken, en ze vonden het goed.  
So I then talked the two young men over my plan, and they thought it a good one.
> Perfect 'heb ... gesproken' + middle field: 'Heb ... gesproken' is the perfect of 'spreken'; the adverb 'toen' and objects sit in the middle field, with the participle at the end. 'De beide jongens' = 'the two young men both'.

Alleen scheen Stern, die een tint van letterkunde over zich heeft--zooals veel Duitschers--stem te willen hebben in de wyze van uitvoering.  
Only Stern, who has a streak of literature about him--as so many Germans do--seemed to want a say in the manner of carrying it out.
> Reflexive 'over zich' in a relative clause: 'Over zich heeft' uses 3rd-person reflexive 'zich' ('has a streak of literature about him'). 'Die' opens the verb-final relative clause describing Stern.
> 'schijnen' + modal + te-infinitive cluster: 'Scheen ... te willen hebben' chains 'schijnen' (seem) + te + modal 'willen' + 'hebben' ('seemed to want to have a say') — a three-verb non-finite cluster at the end.

Dit beviel me nu wel niet zeer, maar omdat de voorjaarsveiling op-hand is, en ik van Ludwig Stern nog geen orders heb, wilde ik hem niet te sterk kontrarieeren.  
Now this did not please me much, but because the spring auction is at hand, and I still have no orders from Ludwig Stern, I did not want to cross him too sharply.
> Causal 'omdat' + 'geen' negation: 'Omdat' opens verb-final causal clauses. 'Geen orders' uses 'geen' (not any) because it negates an indefinite plural noun, where 'niet' would be wrong. 'Op-hand' (modern 'ophanden') = at hand, imminent.
> Modal 'wilde' + 'niet': 'Wilde' (wanted, past of 'willen') sends the infinitive 'kontrarieeren' (to cross/oppose) to the end; 'niet te sterk' negates and qualifies the verb. Note the period spelling with -eeren.

Hy zei dat: "als de borst hem gloeide van gevoel voor het ware en schoone, geen macht ter-wereld hem beletten kon de tonen aanteslaan, die met zulk een gevoel overeenstemmen, en dat hy veel liever zweeg, dan zyn woorden omklemd te zien door de onteerende kluisters der alledaagsheid."--Frits zegt: scheid, maar dit doe ik niet. 't Woord is lang genoeg zoo.--Ik vond dit nu wel heel gek van Stern, maar myn vak gaat me vóór alles, en de Oude is een goed huis.  
He said that: "if the breast glowed within him with feeling for the true and the beautiful, no power on earth could keep him from striking the notes that accord with such a feeling, and that he would far rather hold his tongue than see his words clamped fast by the degrading shackles of the everyday."--Frits says: it should be 'part,' but this I will not do. The word is long enough as it stands.--Now I did find this very odd of Stern, but my trade comes before everything with me, and the Old Man is a sound firm.
> 'geen' + dative 'ter-wereld' + verb-final: 'Geen macht' negates the indefinite subject ('no power'). 'Ter-wereld' fuses 'te der wereld', a frozen dative ('on earth'). The modal 'kon' stands last in this reported 'dat'-clause.
> Participle 'omklemd' + door-agent in te-clause: 'Omklemd ... door' is a past-participle passive ('clamped fast by') with a 'door'-agent, embedded under 'liever ... dan ... te zien'. The lush imagery parodies Stern's literary pretension.
> de Oude / een goed huis: 'De Oude' (the Old Man) is Ludwig Stern, the young Stern's father; 'een goed huis' = a sound, creditworthy firm. Droogstoppel tolerates the son's literary airs only for the father's business.

We stelden dus vast:  
So we settled on the following:

1° Dat hy alle weken een paar hoofdstukken zou leveren voor myn boek. 2° Dat ik in zyn geschryf niets zou veranderen.  
1° That every week he was to deliver a couple of chapters for my book. 2° That I would change nothing in his writing.
> Conditional 'zou leveren' in a 'dat'-clause: Each numbered article is a 'dat'-clause stating the agreed terms; here 'zou leveren' (was to deliver) is the conditional/future-in-the-past, with the verb cluster at the end.

3° Dat Frits de taalfouten verbeteren zou.  
3° That Frits would correct the language mistakes.

4° Dat ik nu-en-dan een hoofdstuk schryven zou, om aan 't boek een soliede voorkomen te geven. 5° Dat de titel zou wezen: de koffiveilingen der Nederlandsche Handelmaatschappy.  
4° That now and then I would write a chapter myself, to give the book a solid appearance. 5° That the title would be: The Coffee Auctions of the Dutch Trading Company.

6° Dat Marie het net afschrift zou maken voor den druk, maar dat men geduld met haar hebben zou, als de wasch kwam.  
6° That Marie would make the fair copy for the printer, but that one would have to be patient with her when the wash came.
> Temporal 'als' + simple past: 'Als' here introduces a recurring-time clause ('when the wash came'), verb-final with the simple past 'kwam'. The laundry interrupting Marie's fair-copying is a domestic comic touch.

7° Dat de afgewerkte hoofdstukken elke week op den krans zouden worden voorgelezen. 8° Dat alle onzedelykheid zou worden vermeden.  
7° That the finished chapters would be read aloud at the circle every week. 8° That all immorality would be avoided.
> Conditional passive 'zouden worden voorgelezen': 'Zouden worden voorgelezen' is a conditional process passive ('would be read aloud'), stacking 'zouden' + 'worden' + participle of the separable 'voorlezen'. 'Afgewerkte' is an attributive participle with -e.
> Conditional passive of 'vermijden': 'Zou worden vermeden' ('would be avoided') is again a conditional worden-passive. The recurring fixation on 'onzedelykheid' (immorality) is Droogstoppel's prudish refrain.

9° Dat myn naam niet op den titel zou staan, omdat ik makelaar ben. 10° Dat Stern een duitsche, een fransche, en een engelsche vertaling van myn boek zou mogen uitgeven, omdat--zoo beweerde hy--zulke werken beter in 't buitenland worden begrepen dan by ons.  
9° That my name would not stand on the title page, because I am a broker. 10° That Stern would be allowed to issue a German, a French, and an English translation of my book, because--so he maintained--such works are better understood abroad than here at home.
> 'niet' negation + dative 'den titel': 'Niet ... zou staan' negates the conditional 'zou staan' ('would not stand'). 'Op den titel' keeps the dative 'den'. The clause is verb-final under 'Dat'.
> Worden-passive + comparative 'beter ... dan': 'Worden begrepen' is the process passive ('are understood'); the comparative 'beter ... dan' ('better ... than') compares abroad with 'by ons' (at home, with us). 'Zulke' is the archaic-flavoured 'such'.

11° (Hierop drong, Stern zeer sterk aan) Dat ik Sjaalman een riem papier, een gros pennen, en een kruikjen inkt zenden zou.  
11° (On this point Stern pressed very hard) That I would send Scarfman a ream of paper, a gross of pens, and a little jug of ink.
> Diminutive 'kruikjen': 'Kruikjen' is the 1860 spelling of the diminutive 'kruikje' (little jug), from 'kruik'. The -je/-jen suffix makes the noun small and neuter.
> Pronominal 'hierop' + separable 'aandringen': 'Hierop' ('on this') is a 'hier-' pronominal adverb; 'drong ... aan' splits the separable 'aandringen' (to insist/press), with 'aan' at the end. 'Iemand iets zenden' uses two objects.

Ik nam met alles genoegen, want er was groote haast by myn boek. Stern had den volgenden dag zyn eerste hoofdstuk gereed, en ziedaar, lezer, de vraag beantwoord, hoe 't komt dat een makelaar in koffi--Last & Co, Lauriergracht N° 37--een boek schryft, dat op een roman gelykt.  
I consented to it all, for there was great haste about my book. By the next day Stern had his first chapter ready, and there you have it, reader, the question answered, of how it comes about that a coffee broker--Last & Co, Lauriergracht No. 37--writes a book that resembles a novel.
> Existential 'er was' + coordinating 'want': 'Er was groote haast' uses existential 'er' ('there was great haste'). 'Want' (for) is coordinating and keeps verb-second order in its clause.
> Relative 'dat' + 'gelijken op': 'Dat' relativizes the het-word 'boek' ('a book that resembles a novel'). 'Gelyken op' (to resemble) is a fixed verb-preposition pair; the verb is final in the relative clause.

Nauwelyks echter was Stern aan zyn werk begonnen, of hy stuitte op moeielykheden. Buiten de zwarigheid om uit zooveel bouwstoffen het noodige uittezoeken en te rangschikken, kwamen er gedurig in de handschriften woorden en uitdrukkingen voor, die hy niet begreep, en die ook mij vreemd waren.  
Yet scarcely had Stern set to his work when he ran into difficulties. Besides the trouble of picking out and arranging the needful matter from so much raw material, there kept turning up in the manuscripts words and expressions he did not understand, and which were strange to me as well.
> 'Nauwelyks ... of' correlative + inversion: 'Nauwelyks ... of' ('scarcely ... when') is a fixed correlative. The fronted 'Nauwelyks' inverts to 'was Stern ... begonnen'; the 'of'-clause delivers the sudden consequence.
> Existential 'er' + separable 'voorkomen' + relative: 'Kwamen er ... voor' uses existential 'er' and the separable 'voorkomen' (to occur), with 'voor' at the end. The relative 'die hy niet begreep' is verb-final with simple past 'begreep'.

Het was meestal javaansch of maleisch. Ook waren hier-en-daar verkortingen aangebracht, die moeielyk te ontcyferen waren.  
It was mostly Javanese or Malay. Here and there, too, abbreviations had been put in that were hard to decipher.
> te-infinitive of capacity: 'te ontcyferen': 'Te ontcyferen waren' is the 'te + infinitive' of possibility/necessity ('were hard to decipher'). The y-spelling 'ontcyferen' is the 1860 'ontcijferen'. The relative 'die' is verb-final.
> Fronted 'Ook' + passive of state: 'Ook' fronted inverts to 'waren ... aangebracht', a state passive ('had been put in'). The separable 'aanbrengen' supplies the participle 'aangebracht' at the end.

Ik zag in, dat we Sjaalman noodig hadden, en daar ik het voor een jong mensch niet goed vind, dat hy verkeerde konnexien aanknoopt, wilde ik noch Stern noch Frits daarheen zenden.  
I saw that we had need of Scarfman, and since I do not think it good for a young man to strike up wrong connections, I wanted to send neither Stern nor Frits over there.
> Causal 'daar' + separable 'aanknopen': 'Daar' is the literary causal 'since'. The embedded 'dat'-clause is verb-final, ending in 'aanknoopt' (from separable 'aanknopen', to strike up). 'Konnexien' is the period spelling of 'connecties'.
> 'noch ... noch' + pronominal 'daarheen': 'Noch ... noch' ('neither ... nor') is a literary correlative negation. The modal 'wilde' sends 'zenden' to the end; 'daarheen' ('thither') is a directional pronominal adverb.

Ik nam suikergoed mee, dat overgebleven was van den laatsten krans-avend--want ik denk altyd aan alles--en ik zocht hem op.  
I took along some sweets that were left over from the last circle evening--for I always think of everything--and I sought him out.
> Relative 'dat' + pluperfect 'was overgebleven': 'Dat' relativizes the het-word 'suikergoed' ('sweets that were left over'). 'Was overgebleven' is the pluperfect with 'zijn' of the separable 'overblijven'. 'Den laatsten ... avend' keeps the dative.

Schitterend was zyn verblyf niet, maar de gelykheid voor alle menschen, dus ook wat hun woningen aangaat, is een hersenschim. Hyzelf had dit gezegd in zyn verhandeling over de aanspraken op geluk.  
His lodging was not splendid, but equality among all men, and so among their dwellings too, is a fancy of the brain. He had said as much himself in his treatise on the claims to happiness.
> Fronted predicate adjective + inversion: 'Schitterend' (splendid) is fronted as the predicate, inverting to 'was zyn verblyf niet'. 'Niet' negates at the end of the main clause.
> 'wat ... aangaat' + possessive 'hun': 'Wat hun woningen aangaat' ('as far as their dwellings are concerned') uses the separable 'aangaan' verb-finally. 'Hun' is the 3rd-person plural possessive.

Bovendien, ik houd niet van menschen die altyd ontevreden zyn. Het was in de Lange-leidsche-dwarsstraat, op een achterkamer.  
Besides, I do not care for people who are always discontented. It was in the Lange-Leidsche-Dwarsstraat, in a back room.
> 'houden van' + relative 'die': 'Houden van' (to like/care for) is a fixed verb-preposition pair, negated by 'niet'. The relative clause 'die altyd ontevreden zyn' is verb-final ('who are always discontented').
> onderhuis / achterkamer: 'Onderhuis' is the ground/basement floor and 'achterkamer' the back room — both signal humble, cheap lodging, the opposite of Droogstoppel's respectable canal-house at the Lauriergracht.

In 't onderhuis woonde een uitdrager die allerlei dingen verkocht, kopjes, schotels, meubels, oude boeken, glaswerk, portretten van Van Speyk, en zoo al meer.  
On the ground floor lived a secondhand dealer who sold all manner of things, cups, dishes, furniture, old books, glassware, portraits of Van Speyk, and so forth.
> Relative 'die' + simple past 'verkocht': 'Die ... verkocht' is a verb-final relative clause ('who sold all manner of things'), with the simple past of the mixed verb 'verkopen' at the end.

Ik was zeer bang iets te breken, want in zoo'n geval vorderen de menschen altyd meer geld voor de zaken, dan ze waard zyn.  
I was very much afraid of breaking something, for in such a case people always demand more money for the goods than they are worth.
> 'want' clause with internal inversion: 'Want' coordinates, but inside its clause the fronted 'in zoo'n geval' inverts to 'vorderen de menschen'. 'Meer geld ... dan' is the comparative 'more ... than'.

Een klein meisje zat op de stoep, en kleedde haar pop aan. Ik vroeg of m'nheer Sjaalman daar woonde?  
A little girl sat on the doorstep, dressing her doll. I asked whether Mr. Scarfman lived there.
> Separable 'aankleden' + possessive 'haar': 'Kleedde ... aan' splits the separable 'aankleden' (to dress), with 'aan' at the clause end. 'Haar pop' uses the possessive 'haar' (her). 'Meisje' is a neuter diminutive, hence grammatically 'het'.
> Indirect yes/no question with 'of': 'Of' (whether) introduces an indirect yes/no question, sending the verb to the end: 'of ... daar woonde'. The simple past 'woonde' closes the clause.

Ze liep weg, en de moeder kwam.  
She ran off, and the mother came.

--Ja, die woont hier, meneer. Gaat uwee maar de trap op, na 'et eerste pertaal, en dan de trap na 'et tweede pertaal, en dan nog 'en trap, en dan is uwee-d-er, want uwe komt er vanzelf.  
--Yes, he lives here, sir. Just go up the stairs, sir, to the first landing, and then up the stairs to the second landing, and then one more flight, and then you're there, sir, for you'll come to it of itself.
> Imperative + dialectal 'uwee': 'Gaat ... op' is an imperative of the separable 'opgaan' (go up), with the polite plural -t ending. 'Uwee'/'uwe' is the landlady's lower-class Amsterdam rendering of polite 'u' — Multatuli renders her speech phonetically.
> Eye-dialect: 'na', 'pertaal': The landlady's speech is spelled as spoken Amsterdammer dialect: 'na' for 'naar' (to), 'pertaal' for 'portaal' (landing), 'et' for 'het'. The phonetic spelling marks her as uneducated.

Myntje, ga 'es eefe segge datter 'en heer is.  
Myntje, go on up and say there's a gentleman.
> Eye-dialect imperative: Dialect spelling throughout: 'ga 'es eefe segge' = 'ga eens even zeggen' (go and just say), 'datter' = 'dat er', ''en' = 'een'. The 's'-for-'z' ('segge' for 'zeggen') marks the unvoiced Amsterdam pronunciation.

Wie kanse segge, dat er is, meneer?  
Who shall she say it is, sir?
> Eye-dialect: 'kanse', 'segge': 'Kanse segge' = 'kan ze zeggen' (can she say); 'segge' again shows the s-for-z spelling of working-class Amsterdam speech. Multatuli's phonetic rendering gives the landlady comic texture.

Ik zei dat ik m'nheer Droogstoppel was, makelaar in koffi, van de Lauriergracht, maar dat ik mezelf wel zou aandienen.  
I said that I was Mr. Drystubble, coffee broker, of the Lauriergracht, but that I would announce myself.
> Reflexive 'mezelf' + separable 'aandienen': 'Mezelf' is the emphatic 1st-person reflexive ('myself'); 'zou aandienen' is the conditional of the separable 'aandienen' (to announce), verb-cluster at the end of the 'dat'-clause.

Ik klom zoo hoog als gezegd was, en hoorde in het derde portaal een kinderstem zingen: strakjes komt vader, die zoete papa. Ik klopte, en de deur werd geopend door een vrouw of dame--ik weet zelf niet recht wat ik van haar maken moest.  
I climbed as high as I had been told, and heard, on the third landing, a child's voice singing: papa's coming soon, that sweet papa. I knocked, and the door was opened by a woman or lady--I myself did not rightly know what to make of her.
> Worden-passive: 'werd geopend': 'Werd geopend' is the simple-past process passive ('was opened'), with the agent in 'door een vrouw of dame'. 'Werd' is the past of the passive auxiliary 'worden'.
> Verb-final indirect question + modal: 'Wat ik van haar maken moest' is a verb-final indirect question ('what to make of her'), with the modal 'moest' at the end. 'Iets van iemand maken' = to make something of / size someone up.

Ze zag zeer bleek.  
She looked very pale.

Haar trekken droegen sporen van vermoeidheid, en deden me denken aan myn vrouw als de wasch beredderd is.  
Her features bore traces of weariness, and put me in mind of my wife when the wash has been seen to.
> Causative 'doen denken' + 'denken aan': 'Deden me denken aan' is causative 'doen' + bare infinitive ('made me think of'), with 'denken aan' a fixed verb-preposition pair. 'Droegen' is the strong simple past of 'dragen'.
> Passive of state 'beredderd is': 'Beredderd is' is a state passive ('has been seen to / settled'). The recurring 'wasch' (the laundry) is the leitmotif of female domestic toil that Droogstoppel notices only as fatigue.

Ze was gekleed in een wit lang hemd, of jak zonder schoot, dat haar tot de knieën hing, en aan de voorzyde met een zwart speldje was vastgemaakt.  
She was dressed in a long white shift, or jacket without skirts, that hung to her knees and was fastened at the front with a little black pin.
> State passive + adjective without -e: 'Was gekleed' is a state passive ('was dressed'). Note 'een wit lang hemd': because 'hemd' is a neuter het-word with the indefinite 'een', the colour adjective 'wit' takes NO -e — the one exception to the -e rule.
> Relative 'dat' + state passive: 'Dat' relativizes the het-word 'hemd'. The clause ends with the simple past 'hing' (strong, from 'hangen') and the state passive 'was vastgemaakt' (was fastened), from separable 'vastmaken'.

In plaats van een behoorlyke japon of rok, droeg ze daaronder een stuk donker gebloemd lynwaad, dat eenige malen om het lyf gewikkeld scheen, en hare heupen en knieën vry nauw omsloot.  
In place of a proper gown or skirt, she wore beneath it a piece of dark flowered linen that seemed to be wrapped several times about her body, and clasped her hips and knees rather closely.
> Fronting + pronominal 'daaronder': The fronted 'In plaats van ...' inverts to 'droeg ze'. 'Daaronder' ('underneath it') is a pronominal adverb. 'Donker gebloemd lynwaad' stacks attributive adjectives before the noun.
> Possessive 'hare' + relative 'dat': 'Hare' is the older inflected form of the possessive 'haar' ('her'). The relative 'dat' (for het-word 'lynwaad') leads a verb-final clause ending in 'omsloot' (strong past of 'omsluiten').
> The sarong, unrecognized: Droogstoppel is describing, without knowing it, a Javanese sarong and kabaai — the everyday dress of the colonies, baffling to his Amsterdam eye. 'Lynwaad' (linen) wrapped about the body marks the household's Indies past.

Er was geen spoor van plooien, wydte of omvang, zooals dit by een vrouw toch behoort.  
There was no trace of pleats, fullness, or breadth, such as there ought to be with a woman after all.
> Comparative 'zooals' + 'behoren': 'Zooals ... behoort' ('such as ... ought to be') is a verb-final comparison clause; 'behoort' (befits, is proper) sits at the end. 'Toch' is the softening particle 'after all'.
> Existential 'er' + 'geen' negation: 'Er was geen spoor' uses existential 'er' with 'geen' negating the indefinite noun 'spoor' ('there was no trace'). 'Geen', not 'niet', is required before such indefinite nouns.

Ik was bly dat ik Frits niet gezonden had, want haar kleeding kwam me zeer onkiesch voor, en het vreemde daarvan werd nog verhoogd door de losheid waarmee ze zich bewoog, als vond ze zich heel goed zoo. Het mensch scheen volstrekt niet te weten dat ze er niet uitzag als andere vrouwen.  
I was glad I had not sent Frits, for her dress struck me as most indecent, and the strangeness of it was heightened still further by the ease with which she moved, as though she found herself quite all right that way. The creature seemed to have no notion at all that she did not look like other women.
> Subordinate clause sends verbs to the end: After dat the clause becomes a bijzin: the subject 'ik' is followed by everything else, and the verbs 'gezonden had' pile up at the very end (participle before finite verb). Note 'niet' negating the whole verbal idea here, not an indefinite noun.
> Separable verb voorkomen 'to seem': This is the separable verb 'voorkomen' (to seem/appear); in the main clause the prefix 'voor' splits off and lands at the end, leaving 'kwam ... voor' wrapped around the rest. Watch for it again as 'kwam het me voor' in the next segment.
> Het mensch — a contemptuous 'creature': Although 'mens' (person) is normally a de-word, the neuter 'het mensch' applied to a woman is dismissive, roughly 'that creature/female' — Droogstoppel's contempt showing in the grammar itself.

Ook kwam het me voor, dat ze volstrekt niet verlegen was over myn komst. Ze verborg niets onder de tafel, verschoof de stoelen niet, en deed niets van wat toch het gebruik is, als er een vreemdeling komt van een deftig voorkomen.  
It also seemed to me that she was not in the least embarrassed by my coming. She hid nothing under the table, did not shove the chairs about, and did none of the things that are after all the custom when a stranger of respectable bearing arrives.
> Fronting forces verb-second: Beginning with 'Ook' (also) pushes the finite verb 'kwam' into second position ahead of the dummy subject 'het', a textbook V2 inversion; the following 'dat'-clause is verb-final with 'was' at the end.
> Existential / presentative er: Here 'er' introduces an indefinite subject coming onto the scene ('when a stranger arrives'); it has no place meaning, just smoothing the entry of 'een vreemdeling'.
> myn, deftig, voorkomen: 'myn' is period 'mijn' (my); 'deftig' means genteel/respectable; and the noun 'voorkomen' here means 'bearing/appearance' — the same root as the verb 'voorkomen' but used as a noun.

Ze had, als een Chinesche, de haren achterover gekamd, en die achter het hoofd in een soort van strik of knoop saamgebonden.  
She had, like a Chinese woman, combed her hair back, and bound it behind her head into a sort of knot or bun.
> Pluperfect with a shared auxiliary: 'had ... gekamd' is the pluperfect (had of hebben + participle); the second participle 'saamgebonden' (= samengebonden) hangs off the same 'had', a common Dutch economy where one auxiliary serves two participles.
> saamgebonden, strik, knoop: 'saamgebonden' is a contracted 'samengebonden' (bound together); 'strik' (a tied knot/bow) and 'knoop' (knot/bun) gloss the hairstyle she has gathered behind her head.

Later heb ik vernomen dat haar kleeding een soort van indische dracht is, die ze daar-te-lande sarong en kabaai noemen, maar ik vond het heel leelyk.  
Later I learned that her dress is a kind of Indian costume, which over there they call sarong and kabaai, but I found it very ugly.
> Present perfect with fronted adverb: 'heb ik vernomen' is the present perfect (hebben + participle), inverted because the sentence opens with 'Later'; the 'dat'-clause then runs to a verb-final 'is'. 'vernomen' is the participle of the strong verb 'vernemen' (to learn/hear).
> daar-te-lande — 'over there in that land': An archaic fixed phrase ('in that country/over there') preserving an old dative '-e' on 'land'; the hyphens are Multatuli's, binding it into one expression.

--Is u juffrouw Sjaalman? vroeg ik.  
--Are you Mrs. Scarfman? I asked.
> Yes/no question and quotative inversion: The question fronts the verb 'Is' before the subject 'u'; then in the reporting tag 'vroeg ik' the verb again precedes 'ik' — Dutch keeps the finite verb forward in both.
> juffrouw — 'Mrs./madam' of middling rank: 'Juffrouw' addressed a woman of the ordinary middle class, below 'mevrouw' (lady/my lady). The whole comic dispute later in the chapter turns on Droogstoppel insisting on 'juffrouw' rather than 'mevrouw'.

--Wien heb ik de eer te spreken? zeide zy, en wel op een toon waarin iets lag, alsof ook ik wat eer had moeten brengen in myn vraag.  
--Whom have I the honor of addressing? said she, and in a tone that carried something in it, as if I too ought to have brought a little more honor into my question.
> Accusative case-remnant 'wien': 'Wien' is the old inflected accusative of 'wie' (whom), a frozen case form alive in solemn 1860 prose; modern Dutch would just say 'wie'. The construction 'de eer te spreken' uses te + infinitive after the noun 'eer'.
> Modal in the pluperfect — the verb cluster: In this 'alsof' subordinate clause the verbs stack at the end: 'had moeten brengen' (pluperfect of the modal 'moeten' governing the bare infinitive 'brengen'). When a modal appears in the perfect it shows up as an infinitive ('moeten', not a participle) — the 'infinitivus pro participio'.
> zeide / zy: 'zeide' is the literary full past of 'zeggen' (modern 'zei'), and 'zy' is period 'zij' (she). Both flag the elevated, slightly archaic register of the woman's reply.

Nu, van komplimenten houd ik niet.  
Now, I am no friend of compliments.
> Fronting an object phrase: The fixed verb 'houden van' (to like) has its 'van'-phrase pulled to the front for emphasis, forcing 'houd ik' inversion: literally 'of compliments like I not'. This V2 reordering is normal Dutch, not poetic license.

Met een principaal is dit wat anders, en ik ben te lang by de zaken, om myn wereld niet te kennen. Maar om daar veel omslag te verkoopen op een derde verdieping, vond ik niet noodig.  
With a principal it is a different matter, and I have been in business too long not to know my world. But to peddle a deal of ceremony there, on a third floor, I did not think necessary.
> om ... te for consequence: 'te lang ... om ... te kennen' is the 'too X to Y' frame built on om ... te + infinitive; the infinitive 'kennen' closes the clause. Here it carries the 'too long in business not to know my world' sense.
> principaal, omslag, derde verdieping: A 'principaal' is a business principal/client; 'omslag' here is fuss or ceremony ('veel omslag verkoopen' = to make a great to-do); 'derde verdieping' is the third floor up — to Droogstoppel a humble address not worth ceremony.

Ik zei dus kort-af, dat ik m'nheer Droogstoppel was, makelaar in koffi, Lauriergracht, N° 37, en dat ik haar man spreken wilde.  
So I said curtly that I was Mr. Drystubble, coffee broker, Lauriergracht, No. 37, and that I wished to speak with her husband.
> Two dat-clauses, verbs at the end: Both reported clauses are verb-final: 'was' ends the first, and the modal cluster 'spreken wilde' (infinitive + finite modal 'wilde') ends the second — in a bijzin the modal follows its infinitive.
> koffi, kort-af: 'Koffi' is the period spelling of 'koffie' (coffee); 'kort-af' (modern kortaf) means curt, brusque — exactly Droogstoppel's manner.

Wel ja, waarom zou ik omslag maken?  
Well, yes, why should I stand on ceremony?
> Conditional zou for a rhetorical question: 'zou' (past of zullen) + infinitive 'maken' forms the conditional: 'why should/would I make a fuss?' Note the infinitive 'maken' parked at the end, after the verb-second 'zou'.

Ze wees my een matten stoeltjen aan, en nam een klein meisje op den schoot, dat op den grond zat te spelen.  
She pointed me to a little rush-bottomed chair, and took onto her lap a small girl who had been sitting on the floor at play.
> Separable verb aanwijzen: 'aanwijzen' (to point out/indicate) is separable: in this past-tense main clause the prefix 'aan' breaks off and goes to the end, framing 'wees my een matten stoeltjen aan'. 'stoeltjen' is a diminutive (modern 'stoeltje').
> Relative dat + 'zitten te' progressive: 'dat' is the relative pronoun for the neuter 'meisje' ('a little girl who...'). The clause is verb-final, and 'zat te spelen' (sat at playing) is the Dutch posture-verb progressive: a verb of position + te + infinitive expresses ongoing action.
> Case-remnant 'den' after a preposition: 'op den schoot', 'op den grond': the masculine accusative article 'den' (modern 'de') survives here, a frozen case-ending typical of 1860 written Dutch.

De kleine jongen dien ik had hooren zingen, zag me strak aan, en bekeek me van 't hoofd tot de voeten.  
The little boy whom I had heard singing stared at me fixedly, and looked me over from head to foot.
> Accusative relative 'dien' + perception verb: 'dien' is the old masculine-accusative relative ('whom'), modern 'die'. 'had hooren zingen' is a perfect-tense perception construction: hearing/seeing verbs take a bare infinitive, and in the perfect both 'hooren' and 'zingen' appear as infinitives, not participles.
> Separable aankijken vs. inseparable bekijken: 'aanzien' splits ('zag ... aan' = looked at fixedly), while 'bekeek' (from 'bekijken', to look over) keeps its prefix attached — a neat minimal pair of separable vs. inseparable verbs in one line.

Die scheen ook volstrekt niet verlegen! Het was een knaapje van een jaar of zes, ook al vreemd gekleed.  
He too seemed not in the least bashful! He was a little fellow of six years or so, also oddly dressed.
> Diminutive knaapje + impersonal het: 'knaapje' is the diminutive of 'knaap' (lad), automatically neuter. The sentence opens with the impersonal/identifying 'Het was...', and 'een jaar of zes' is the idiom 'six years or so'.
> Past participle as predicate adjective: 'gekleed' (participle of 'kleden', to dress) functions adjectivally here ('dressed'), modified by 'vreemd' (oddly) — the ge-...-d participle doing descriptive duty rather than building a tense.

Zyn wyd broekje reikte ter-nauwernood tot de helft van de dy, en de beentjes waren bloot van daar tot aan den enkel. Heel indecent, vind ik.  
His wide little breeches reached barely to the middle of the thigh, and his little legs were bare from there down to the ankle. Most indecent, I find.
> A cluster of diminutives: 'broekje' (little breeches) and 'beentjes' (little legs) are diminutives in -je/-tjes, here softening and miniaturizing the boy's clothing and limbs; the diminutive makes any noun neuter ('het broekje').
> ternauwernood, dy, enkel: 'ter-nauwernood' (modern ternauwernood) means barely/scarcely; 'dy' is the period form of 'dij' (thigh); 'enkel' is ankle. Note the case-remnant 'tot aan den enkel'.

"Kom je om papa te spreken?" vroeg hy op-eens, en ik begreep terstond dat de opvoeding van dat knaapje veel te wenschen overliet, anders had hy: "komt u" gezegd. Maar omdat ik met myn houding verlegen was, en wel wat praten wilde, antwoordde ik:  
"Have you come to talk to papa?" he asked all at once, and I understood at once that the boy's upbringing left much to be desired, for otherwise he would have said: "have you, sir." But because I was at a loss for what to do with myself, and felt rather like talking, I answered:
> om ... te purpose clause: 'om papa te spreken' = 'in order to speak to papa', the purpose frame om ... te + infinitive, with 'spreken' at the end. The boy's informal 'je' is precisely what Droogstoppel notes as bad upbringing.
> Implied conditional: pluperfect doing irrealis work: 'had hy ... gezegd' is a pluperfect used counterfactually ('otherwise he would have said'), with 'anders' fronted forcing 'had hy' inversion. The polite alternative 'komt u' uses the formal pronoun 'u'.
> omdat sends the verb to the end: The subordinating conjunction 'omdat' (because) opens a verb-final clause: subject 'ik', then the adverbials, then 'was' at the very end.

--Ja, kereltje, ik kom om je papa te spreken. Zou hy spoedig komen, denk je?  
--Yes, little chap, I have come to talk to your papa. Will he be along soon, do you think?
> Future/conjecture with zullen: 'Zou hy ... komen' uses 'zou' (past of zullen) + infinitive for a softened expectation about the future, 'will he come soon, do you think?' — gentler than the bare present.
> kereltje — affectionate diminutive: 'kereltje' is the diminutive of 'kerel' (fellow/chap), here a friendly 'little chap'. Droogstoppel deploys it to ingratiate himself with the boy.

--Dat weet ik niet.  
--That I don't know.
> Fronted object 'Dat' + V2: The demonstrative object 'Dat' (that) is fronted for emphasis, putting the verb 'weet' second before the subject 'ik': literally 'That know I not.' A crisp V2 example with sentence-negating 'niet'.

Hy is uit, en zoekt geld om een verfdoos voor me te koopen. (Frits zegt: verwdoos, maar dit doe ik niet. Verf is verf, en geen verw.)  
He's out, looking for money to buy a paintbox for me. (Frits says 'paynt-box,' but this I will not do. Paint is paint, and not paynt.)
> om ... te purpose clause: 'om een verfdoos voor me te koopen' = 'in order to buy a paintbox for me'; the purpose marker 'om' opens and 'te koopen' (period spelling of 'kopen') closes the clause.
> verf vs. verw — a spelling joke: Droogstoppel mocks Frits's spelling 'verwdoos' and insists 'Verf is verf, en geen verw.' The joke turns on competing 19th-century spellings of 'paint', a wink at the very period orthography this text is full of. Note 'geen' negating the indefinite noun.

--Stil, myn jongen, zei de vrouw. Speel wat met je prenten of met de chinesche speeldoos.  
--Hush, my boy, said the woman. Play a while with your pictures or with the Chinese music-box.
> Imperatives — bare stem commands: 'Speel' is the imperative (bare verb stem) of 'spelen' — a direct command, 'play'. 'Stil' is an elliptical command 'hush/quiet'.
> prenten, speeldoos: 'prenten' are pictures/prints; 'speeldoos' (compound of spelen + doos) is a music-box. 'chinesche' shows the period sch- spelling of 'chinese'.

--Je weet immers dat die m'nheer gister alles heeft meegenomen.  
--But you know that gentleman carried everything off yesterday.
> Separable verb in a dat-clause: Inside the 'dat'-clause the separable verb 'meenemen' (to take along/off) keeps its parts together at the end as the participle 'meegenomen', and the auxiliary 'heeft' is pushed right up against it: 'heeft meegenomen'. The flavoring particle 'immers' adds 'as you know'.

Ook zyn moeder noemde hy: je, en er scheen een "heer" geweest te zijn, die alles "meegenomen had" ... een vroolyk bezoek!  
His mother, too, he addressed as "you," and there seemed to have been some "gentleman" who had "carried everything off" ... a merry visit indeed!
> Object fronting and V2: The object 'Ook zyn moeder' (his mother too) is fronted for emphasis, so the verb 'noemde' comes second before the subject 'hy': literally 'Also his mother addressed he as je'. A clear demonstration that V2 counts the first constituent, not the subject.
> Existential er + te-infinitive: 'er ... een heer' is the presentative 'er' introducing an indefinite subject; 'scheen ... geweest te zijn' is 'schijnen' (to seem) governing a te-infinitive (here a perfect infinitive, 'to have been').

De vrouw scheen ook niet opgeruimd, want ter-sluik wischte zy haar oog af, terwyl zy 't kleine meisje by haar broertje bracht.  
The woman did not seem cheerful either, for on the sly she wiped her eye while she brought the little girl over to her little brother.
> want coordinates; separable afwisschen/afwissen: 'want' (for/because) is a coordinating conjunction — it does NOT send the verb to the end; the clause keeps main-clause order. The separable verb 'afwisschen' (to wipe away) splits, with 'af' at the end: 'wischte ... af'.
> terwyl — verb-final subordinate clause: 'terwyl' (while) is subordinating, so 'bracht' goes to the end. 'broertje' is the diminutive of 'broer' (little brother).
> opgeruimd, ter-sluik: 'opgeruimd' here means cheerful/in good spirits (not 'tidied up'); 'ter-sluik' (modern tersluiks) means furtively, on the sly.

"Dáár, zeide zy, speel wat met Nonni." Een rare naam.  
"There, said she, play a while with Nonni." An odd name.
> Imperative + flavoring 'wat': 'speel' is again the imperative (play); 'wat' here is the colloquial 'a bit/a while', softening the command rather than meaning 'what'.

En dit deed hy.  
And this he did.
> Fronted object 'dit' triggers inversion: Opening with the demonstrative object 'dit' (this) puts the verb 'deed' second, before the subject 'hy': 'And this did he.' A minimal, crisp example of V2 word order.

--Wel juffrouw, vroeg ik, verwacht u spoedig uw man?  
--Well, madam, I asked, do you expect your husband soon?
> Question inversion with formal u / uw: The verb 'verwacht' fronts before the formal subject 'u' to form the question. 'uw' is the formal possessive ('your'), matching the polite 'u' — the register Droogstoppel uses with the adult woman.

--Ik kan 't niet bepalen, antwoordde zy.  
--I cannot say for certain, she answered.
> bepalen — 'to say for certain': 'bepalen' literally 'to determine/fix', so 'ik kan 't niet bepalen' = 'I cannot say for certain/pin it down'. The clitic 'het' shrinks to ''t', very common in this speech.

Daar liet op-eens de kleine jongen, die met zyn zusje schuitjevaren gespeeld had, deze in den steek, en vroeg my:  
Then all at once the little boy, who had been playing boats with his little sister, abandoned her, and asked me:
> Separable idiom 'in de steek laten': The fixed separable expression 'in de(n) steek laten' (to abandon/let down) splits across the clause: 'liet ... deze in den steek'. The relative clause 'die ... gespeeld had' (who had played) is verb-final.
> schuitjevaren, zusje: 'schuitjevaren' is a children's game ('playing boats', built on the diminutive 'schuitje', little boat); 'zusje' is the diminutive of 'zus' (little sister).

--M'nheer, waarom zeg je tegen mama: juffrouw?  
--Sir, why do you say 'madam' to mama?
> wh-question and informal 'je': 'waarom' fronts and the verb 'zeg' stands second before 'je'; with the inverted subject the verb keeps the bare stem ('zeg je', not 'zegt je') — a hallmark of Dutch present-tense conjugation. The child's casual 'je' is again the social marker.

--Hoe dan, kereltje, zei ik, wat moet ik dan zeggen?  
--How then, little chap, said I, what ought I to say then?
> Modal moeten with the verb at the end: The modal 'moeten' (must/ought) sends the main verb to the end as a bare infinitive: 'wat moet ik dan zeggen?' = 'what must I then say?'

--Wel ... zooals andere menschen! De juffrouw is beneden.  
--Why ... like other people! The madam is downstairs.
> Article + the boy's logic: The definite article 'De juffrouw' marks the specific woman downstairs (the shopkeeper) — the boy reserves 'juffrouw' for her, which is exactly the social distinction the chapter plays on. 'beneden' = downstairs.

Ze verkoopt schotels en priktollen.  
She sells dishes and spinning-tops.
> schotels, priktollen: 'schotels' are dishes/platters; 'priktollen' are spinning-tops you start with a string-prick — the cheap wares the downstairs 'juffrouw' sells, underlining her lower station.

Nu ben ik makelaar in koffi--Last & Co, Lauriergracht, N° 37--we zyn met ons dertienen op 't kantoor, en als ik Stern meereken, die geen salaris ontvangt, zyn er veertien.  
Now I am a coffee broker--Last & Co, Lauriergracht, No. 37--there are thirteen of us at the office, and if I count in Stern, who draws no salary, there are fourteen.
> Counting idiom + existential er: 'met ons dertienen' is the Dutch idiom for 'thirteen of us'. 'zyn er veertien' uses 'er' in its counting/existential role ('there are fourteen'), and 'als ik Stern meereken' shows the separable 'meerekenen' (to count in) verb-final after 'als'.
> Relative die + geen-negation: 'die' is the relative pronoun (for the de-word implied by 'Stern'), and 'geen' negates the indefinite noun 'salaris' (no salary) — the rule that 'geen', not 'niet', negates an indefinite object.

Welnu, myn vrouw is: juffrouw, en moest ik nu tegen dàt mensch: mevrouw zeggen?  
Well now, my wife is 'madam,' and was I now to say 'my lady' to that creature?
> Modal in past as deliberative question: 'moest ik ... zeggen?' inverts the past modal 'moest' (had to/was I to) with 'zeggen' parked at the end — 'was I now to say mevrouw?'. The stressed demonstrative 'dàt mensch' drips with Droogstoppel's contempt.

Dit ging toch niet! Ieder moet in zyn stand blyven, en wat meer is, gister hadden de deurwaarders den boel weggehaald.  
That would never do! Everyone must keep to his station, and what is more, the bailiffs had carried off the whole lot the day before.
> Modal moeten + final infinitive: 'moet ... blyven' (must stay) is the modal 'moeten' sending 'blyven' to the end — a gnomic statement of Droogstoppel's class creed: everyone must keep to his station.
> Pluperfect + separable weghalen + 'den': 'hadden ... weggehaald' is the pluperfect of the separable 'weghalen' (to carry off). The accusative case-remnant 'den boel' (the lot/the stuff) survives. Fronting 'gister' triggers 'hadden de deurwaarders' inversion.

Ik vond myn: juffrouw dus wèl, en bleef er by. Ik vroeg waarom Sjaalman zich niet by my had aangemeld om zyn pak terug te halen?  
So I found my 'madam' quite right, and stuck to it. I asked why Scarfman had not presented himself to me to fetch back his parcel.
> Reflexive verb in a verb-final clause: 'zich aanmelden' (to present/report oneself) is reflexive and separable; in this indirect-question clause the reflexive 'zich' sits early and the verbs cluster at the end: 'had aangemeld' (pluperfect). 'om ... terug te halen' is a purpose om...te clause.
> wèl, erbij blijven: Stressed 'wèl' affirms ('quite right', countering the doubt); 'bleef er by' is the idiom 'erbij blijven' (to stick to it), with the pronominal adverb 'er...by' standing for 'by it'.

Ze scheen er van te weten, en zei, dat zy op-reis waren geweest, en wel naar Brussel.  
She seemed to know about it, and said that they had been away on a journey, to Brussels in fact.
> Pronominal adverb 'ervan': 'er van' (modern ervan) is a pronominal adverb replacing 'van het/dat' — 'to know of/about it'. Dutch cannot say 'van het weten' with a thing, so the preposition fuses with 'er'. 'scheen ... te weten' = schijnen + te-infinitive.
> Pluperfect with zijn: 'waren geweest' is the pluperfect of 'zijn' (to be) — itself conjugated with 'zijn' as auxiliary. In the 'dat'-clause it stands at the end. 'op-reis' = away on a journey.

Dat hy daar voor de Indépendance gewerkt had, maar dat hy er niet had kunnen blyven, omdat zyn artikels oorzaak waren dat het blad aan de fransche grenzen zoo dikwyls werd afgewezen. Dat ze sedert eenige dagen in Amsterdam teruggekeerd waren, omdat Sjaalman hier een betrekking zou krygen ...  
That there he had worked for the Indépendance, but that he had not been able to stay, because his articles were the reason the paper was so often turned back at the French border. That for some days now they had returned to Amsterdam, because Scarfman was to get a post here ...
> Modal in pluperfect: infinitivus pro participio: 'had kunnen blyven' — the modal 'kunnen' appears as a bare infinitive (not a participle) alongside 'blyven' after the auxiliary 'had'. This double-infinitive cluster at the clause end is the standard Dutch pattern for a modal in the perfect.
> Passive with worden: 'werd afgewezen' is the worden-passive (worden + past participle): the newspaper 'was turned back/refused' — the subject undergoing the action. It sits verb-final inside the 'dat'-clause.
> Conditional/future zou in reported speech: 'zou krygen' (zou + infinitive) is the past-future used in indirect speech — 'was to get a post'. In the 'omdat'-clause the verbs close it out at the end.

--Zeker by Gaafzuiger? vroeg ik. Ja, dat was het!  
--With Gaafzuiger, no doubt? I asked. Yes, that was it!
> Gaafzuiger — a satirical name: Multatuli's names tell on their bearers: 'Gaafzuiger' suggests one who sucks out what is whole or honest — gaaf (whole, sound, honest) + zuiger (sucker). Like 'Droogstoppel' (dry-stubble) and 'Sjaalman' (scarf-man), the name is a small comic verdict on the character.

Maar dit was tegengeloopen, zeide zy.  
But this had fallen through, said she.
> tegenloopen — 'to fall through': 'tegenloopen' (modern tegenlopen) means to go wrong/fall through; 'dit was tegengeloopen' = this had not worked out. It is a separable verb, here in its participle form.

Nu, hiervan wist ik meer dan zyzelf.  
Now, of this I knew more than she did herself.
> Pronominal adverb + comparative + fronting: 'hiervan' (of this) is a pronominal adverb fronted to first position, so 'wist ik' inverts (V2). 'meer dan zyzelf' shows the comparative with 'dan' (than). 'zyzelf' = zij zelf, herself.

Hy had de Aglaia laten vallen, en was lui, pedant en ziekelyk ... precies, dáárom was hy weggejaagd. --En, ging ze voort, dat hy zeker dezer dagen by my komen zou, en misschien wel juist naar my toe was, om antwoord te vragen op 't verzoek dat hy my gedaan had.  
He had let the Aglaia drop, and was lazy, pedantic, and sickly ... precisely, that was why he had been sent packing. --And, she went on, he would surely come to me one of these days, and was perhaps even on his way to me just then, to ask for an answer to the request he had made of me.
> Causative laten + bare infinitive: 'laten vallen' (to let drop / drop) is the causative 'laten' + bare infinitive 'vallen'; in the pluperfect 'had ... laten vallen' both verbs are infinitives clustered at the end. Figuratively, he let the Aglaia journal fail.
> Passive/perfect of separable wegjagen: 'was ... weggejaagd' (driven away / sent packing) is the participle of separable 'wegjagen' with 'zijn' — read here as a state/perfect. Fronting 'dáárom' (therefore) forces 'was hy' inversion.
> Genitive remnant 'dezer dagen' + future zou: 'dezer dagen' is a frozen genitive ('of these days' = one of these days), the old -er ending on the demonstrative. The clause ends with the future cluster 'komen zou' (infinitive + finite zou), verb-final after the implied 'dat'.

Ik zei dat Sjaalman maar eens komen zou, maar dat hy niet moest schellen, want dit is zoo lastig voor de meid. Als hy wat wachtte, zei ik, zou de deur wel eens opengaan, als er iemand uit moest.  
I said that Scarfman might just come along, but that he was not to ring, for that is such a nuisance for the maid. If he waited a while, I said, the door would surely open at some point, when someone had to go out.
> Modal moeten negated + want coordination: 'moest niet schellen' — the modal in the past with 'niet' = 'was not to ring'. 'want' then coordinates a main clause (no verb-final), giving the reason 'for this is so troublesome for the maid'.
> Conditional als-clause + zou main clause: 'Als hy wat wachtte' is the verb-final conditional (if he waited); the main clause then inverts to 'zou de deur ... opengaan' (the door would open), with the separable 'opengaan' as the infinitive after 'zou'.

En toen ging ik heen, en nam myn bruidsuikers weer mee, want, ronduit gezegd, het beviel me daar niet.  
And then I went off, and took my sugarplums away with me again, for, to put it plainly, I did not like it there.
> Separable heengaan and meenemen: Two separable verbs in a row: 'ging ... heen' (heengaan, to go away) and 'nam ... weer mee' (meenemen, to take along). Fronting 'En toen' (and then) gives 'ging ik' inversion.

Ik voelde me niet op myn gemak.  
I did not feel at my ease.
> op zijn gemak — 'at ease': The fixed expression 'op zijn gemak zijn' means to be at ease/comfortable; 'ik voelde me niet op myn gemak' = I did not feel at ease. The reflexive 'me' goes with 'voelen'.

Een makelaar is toch geen kruier, dunkt me, en ik beweer dat ik er fatsoenlyk uitzie. Ik had mijn jas met bont aan, en toch zat ze daar zoo eenvoudig, en praatte zoo kalm met haar kinderen, alsof ze alleen was.  
A broker is no porter, I should think, and I maintain that I make a respectable appearance. I had my coat with fur on, and yet she sat there so plainly, and chatted so calmly with her children, as if she were alone.
> Separable 'eruitzien' with er: 'eruitzien' (to look/appear) packs 'er' + 'uit' around the verb: 'ik er fatsoenlyk uitzie' = I look respectable. In the 'dat'-clause the cluster goes verb-final ('uitzie').
> alsof — subordinate verb-final: 'alsof' (as if) subordinates and sends 'was' to the end. Note the chained 'zat ... en praatte' main-clause verbs before it, set against this verb-final 'alsof'-clause.

Bovendien ze scheen geschreid te hebben, en ontevreden menschen kan ik niet verdragen. Ook was 't er koud en ongezellig --zeker omdat de boel weggehaald was--en ik houd veel van gezelligheid in een kamer.  
Besides, she seemed to have been weeping, and I cannot abide discontented people. It was cold and cheerless there, too--no doubt because the furniture had been carried off--and I am very fond of coziness in a room.
> schijnen + perfect te-infinitive: 'scheen ... te hebben' is 'schijnen' (to seem) governing a perfect infinitive: 'geschreid te hebben' = 'to have wept'. 'geschreid' is the participle of the literary 'schreien' (to weep).
> Object-fronting for emphasis: The object 'ontevreden menschen' (discontented people) is fronted, putting 'kan ik' in inversion — 'discontented people I cannot abide'. A vivid V2 example with a modal ('kan') + final infinitive 'verdragen'.
> Passive/perfect of weghalen, verb-final: 'weggehaald was' — the separable 'weghalen' participle with 'zijn', in the verb-final 'omdat'-clause, read as a resultant state ('because the furniture had been carried off').

Onder het naar-huis gaan besloot ik het met Bastiaans nog eens aantezien, omdat ik niet gaarne iemand op-straat zet.  
On the way home I resolved to give Bastiaans yet another chance, because I am loath to put anyone out on the street.
> Nominalized infinitive + fronting: 'het naar-huis gaan' is an infinitive used as a neuter noun ('the going home'), governed by 'onder' (during). Fronting this phrase inverts the main verb: 'besloot ik' (I resolved).
> te + infinitive written joined: 'aantezien': 'aantezien' is the separable 'aanzien' with infixed 'te' — a hallmark 1860 spelling that glues 'aan + te + zien' into one word ('to give another look/chance'). Modern Dutch writes 'aan te zien'.
> omdat verb-final + archaic 'gaarne': 'omdat' sends 'zet' to the end. 'gaarne' (gladly/willingly) is an archaic/literary adverb, modern 'graag'; 'niet gaarne' = 'reluctant/loath'.

Nu volgt de eerste week van Stern.  
Now follows the first week of Stern.
> Fronted adverb 'Nu' + V2: Opening with 'Nu' (now) puts the verb 'volgt' second, before the subject 'de eerste week': 'Now follows the first week of Stern.' A clean V2 illustration.

Het spreekt vanzelf dat er veel in voorkomt, dat my niet bevalt.  
It goes without saying that there is much in it that does not please me.
> Impersonal het + separable voorkomen: 'Het spreekt vanzelf' is an impersonal idiom ('it goes without saying') with dummy 'het'. The verb-final 'dat'-clause has the separable 'voorkomen' (to occur/appear) closing as 'voorkomt', and 'er ... in' adds the location 'in it'.

Maar ik moet me houden aan artikel twee, en de Rosemeyers hebben 't goed gevonden. Ik geloof, dat ze Stern in de hoogte steken, omdat hy een oom heeft te Hamburg die in suiker doet.  
But I must hold to article two, and the Rosemeyers thought it good. I believe they puff Stern up, because he has an uncle in Hamburg who deals in sugar.
> omdat verb-final + relative die: 'omdat' sends 'heeft' to the end of its clause; then the relative 'die' (for the de-word 'oom') opens a further verb-final clause closing on 'doet'. 'in suiker doen' = to deal in sugar.
> in de hoogte steken — 'to puff up': The idiom 'iemand in de hoogte steken' means to praise excessively / build someone up. Droogstoppel suspects the Rosemeyers flatter Stern only because of his sugar-trading uncle — commerce coloring everything.

Sjaalman was er inderdaad geweest. Hy had Stern gesproken, en aan dezen eenige woorden en zaken uitgelegd, die hy niet begreep.  
Scarfman had indeed been there. He had spoken with Stern, and had explained to him a number of words and matters that he did not understand.
> Dative case-remnant 'dezen' + separable uitleggen: 'aan dezen' uses the old masculine dative '-en' on the demonstrative ('to this one' = to Stern). 'uitgelegd' is the participle of separable 'uitleggen' (to explain), here in a pluperfect with the earlier 'had'.

Die Stern niet begreep, meen ik. Ik verzoek nu den lezer de volgende hoofdstukken doortebyten, dan beloof ik naderhand weer iets van meer solieden aard, van my, Batavus Droogstoppel, makelaar in koffi: Last & Co, Lauriergracht, N° 37.  
That Stern did not understand, I mean. I now beg the reader to chew his way through the following chapters, and then I promise afterward something of more solid sort again, from me, Batavus Drystubble, coffee broker: Last & Co, Lauriergracht, No. 37.
> Accusative 'den lezer' + joined te-infinitive: 'den lezer' shows the accusative case-remnant 'den'. 'doortebyten' is the separable 'doorbijten' with infixed 'te' written as one word — the 1860 spelling of 'door te bijten' (to chew/bite one's way through).
---

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.