# You are not American



## largoplazo2

I became familiar with basic Dutch a very long time ago but now I bought a Pimsleur course to help me bone up on it. I'm already surprised by a couple of usage examples. Am I just not remembering correctly, or has anything changed about spoken Dutch in the last 35 years?

1. For "I don't speak English", they give "Ik spreek geen Engels," which, to me, is more technically "I speak no English." OK, those are functionally the same thing, so I'm not going to gripe about a technicality. But later on, for "You are not American", where I would have expected "U bent niet amerikaan", they have "U bent geen amerikaan", which sounds awfully emphatic to me, like something an American political extremist would say to another American from the opposite side of the spectrum, "You call yourself an _American??_ You, sir, are no American!" But is this really correct? Is "U bent geen amerikaan" really a normal way of saying "You aren't an American"?

....

Is Pimsleur completely correct or do I have a point?


----------



## Peterdg

Again (because of the other thread), Pimsleur is correct.

By the way: "U bent niet amerikaan" sounds clumsy (even incorrect, although I can imagine you could come up with some context where this could possibly fit).


----------



## El País Bajo

I see your point, but yes, Pimsleur is correct.
"U bent geen amerikaan", literally translated, indeed seems to indicate that the person in question is "not one of the American people".
But that is the only acceptable way of saying it. "U bent niet amerikaans" makes sense, but it is not said.


----------



## Kworb

It's a pretty weird example, why would you tell someone what nationality they are or aren't?

I think the proper way is to use "niet" before the adjective and "geen" before the noun.

So:
Ik ben niet Amerikaans. (I am not American)
Ik ben geen Amerikaan. (I am not an American)

Hij is niet Amerikaans. (He is not American)
Hij is geen Amerikaan. (He is not an American)

Both sound acceptable to me, although the "geen" usage is far more common.


----------



## NewtonCircus

Dag Largoplazo,

You're probably more confused now than before the answers in this thread. At least I am .

This thread falls into the "We know how, just not why” category and I am afraid that you need an answer from a person with a formal language training to explain where "geen" or "niet" or both is(are) appropriate.

Cheers Herman


----------



## Peterdg

NewtonCircus said:


> Dag Largoplazo,
> 
> You're probably more confused now than before the answers in this thread. At least I am .
> 
> This thread falls into the "We know how, just not why” category and I am afraid that you need an answer from a person with a formal language training to explain where "geen" or "niet" or both is(are) appropriate.
> 
> Cheers Herman


Well, that's easy:

Ik ben geen + _noun, zelfstandig naamwoord, substantief "_Ik ben geen God, ik ben geen Antwerpenaar".
Ik ben niet + _adjective, bijvoegelijk naamwoord_. "Ik ben niet goddelijk, ik ben niet Antwerps".

Peter


----------



## NewtonCircus

Dag Peter,



Peterdg said:


> Well, that's easy:
> Ik ben geen + _noun, zelfstandig naamwoord, substantief "_Ik ben geen God, ik ben geen Antwerpenaar".
> Ik ben niet + _adjective, bijvoegelijk naamwoord_. "Ik ben niet goddelijk, ik ben niet Antwerps".
> Peter



That would mean that _"U bent niet Amerikaan"_ is wrong. Judged by the answers I get the impression that this is not always the case. 

Groetjes Herman


----------



## Peterdg

What could be right is "U bent niet-Amerikaan", with the dash. In this case, "niet-Amerikaan" is a noun, as is "Amerikaan" but then there is no negation anymore.


----------

