"Not good for the garden" Im dying 😂

You are the best. All your videos are short and simple. Thank you for everything you do for us.

i love the explanation.

i view "er" as a reference to another subject formerly mentioned, so it's pretty much applicable as widely as there are subjects, which is extremely broad i think it actually comes closer to "it" than it comes to "there" more often than not, the direct translation of het->it just throws people off in conceptualising it in broader meaning as much as er->there does... hear me out :) it can be something, someone, a time, or a place, basically anything that can be a subject or a target destination can be "er" the way i see it even plural, it can also mean multiple objects or people or any kind of grouping/categorization, hell it can even mean a state of mind or being or more vague, less tangible matter, it just refers to things, what things? anything you want it to lol if you were to say "ik heb er 3", it would translate to something like "i have 3 of them", "er" would be closest to "them"/"those" in that case, dumb it down and it's "i have 3 of it" if you have a headache, and you say "ik heb er last van" -> "i suffer from it"/"experience discomfort from it", the it being the headache, in that case it's an it, you just have to dereference the "headache" to an "it" in your head and then "it" makes a lot more sense it is conceptually very very close to "it", but it can be applied and conveyed in dutch language more than the word "it" does in english however... as a concept, "it" can be just about anything too though.. literally anything that exists is technically an "it", if something is, then it has to be something, right? what is that something? -> it, it is implied... dare i say inferred that anything that exists is an it, if it exists, you must be able to observe and/or define it, what? it. anything that is, can be it. even our concept of "nothing" is something, if it really were nothing, it wouldn't exist and we wouldn't be able to conceptualise it... ok i'm going a bit too deep down the hole here lol i guess what i'm trying to say, is: if you look at it in a very philosophical way, it makes a lot of sense why it comes closer to "it" rather than just "there" which is just a microscopic subset of "it" just pay attention on how often you use the word "it" in english in a way that's similar to "er", even that is enough to drive you nuts unless you go out of your way to avoid using... it, like i just tried lol breaking down the meaning of every dutch "er" is a recipe for spiraling into madness, we don't even realise we use it that much, they just come with the territory lol translating "it" to just "het" would not do it complete justice linguistically either, although conceptually it very much is "het", anything can be "het"/ït" we just don't use it that way in language, but one can see how similar it can be when you disconnect from the meanings they have standing on themselves and just think of it as the very broad concept of "it", as used in "what time is it?" and "what do you make of it?", where they are a bit more idiomatic than referring strictly to tangible inanimate objects. the words you choose to go together with "er" as the subject, are quite specific in their use to convey certain emotional states too. because they border (or "err", lol) on the figure of speech side and those don't always translate well 1:1, although there are plenty of idioms that are very samey between english and dutch, sometimes it's another animal or another action, but it's easy enough to see the logical deduction made and the parallels conveying the proper emotion with the choice of words on top of that complicates matter even more, and makes it very difficult to really speak like a native when it comes to "er" but ofcourse, in and by itself it mostly means "daar" (there) too. in certain regions of the netherlands and belgium they distinguish a bit more between "erheen" and "daarheen", "daar" specifically being a destination place. western germans use "dahin" aswell, so its closer in 1:1 translation too, which probably is one of the reasons it is more distinguished because of more cross-pollination with german hope i've conveyed it clearly enough for native speakers, my understanding of english is a perpetual work in progress as well (as should most things in life be, always keep learning)

Dankjewel het is echt handig

Short vidio but in point I like it

It is brilliant as usual. I like that you organize your explanations. Also I have question . Can er be used for a person? For example: Ik hou van jou. -> Ik hou ervan Ik hou van Mary. -> Ik hou ervan TIA

Thank you very much for the explanations. I understand them in theory but I still find it difficult to put them into practise. Ik zie de soortgelijkheden met de andere talen, zoals in frans "en". "Ik heb er vier van" is een beetje zoals in frans "J' en ai cuatre." maar nederlands in een germanse taal en in duits, mijn moedertaal, gebrouk je niet deze structuren. In engels meer: There is ... Als ik nederlands spreek, weet ik nu vaak niet of ik nu een "er" moet benoeten of niet. Ik heb de indruk dat de nederlanders het vaak als "Füllwort" ( filler ) benoeten.

Succes

I assume it's similar to the French "en" et "y"

De eerste keer dat Mijn leraar heeft van “er” gesproken ik Weerd depressief 😅

Waarom zeggen wij ik kijk naar ze? Mogen wij ook naar hen zeggen?

"Er" is such a confusing word lmao