Post History
This article explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some so...
Answer
#3: Post edited
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2020-12-05T19:57:16Z (almost 4 years ago)
Additional research on the Surinamese usage didn't confirm my earlier claim.
- [This article](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/is-er-een-verschil-tussen-u-hebt-en-u-heeft~b63c7501/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[^1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some sources indicate that "u heeft" is now considered formal in contrast to the unmarked "u hebt", while other sources list them as equivalents.
No regional dependency is mentioned in the source, although I suspect that [Surinamese Dutch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinamese_Dutch) still preferentially uses the older form while current European Dutch preferentially uses the newer one.- [^1]: In a crude analogy, like English "Your Grace has". However, the Dutch usage wasn't and isn't limited to the addressing of dukes. It was a polite way of saying "you have".
- [This article](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/is-er-een-verschil-tussen-u-hebt-en-u-heeft~b63c7501/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[^1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some sources indicate that "u heeft" is now considered formal in contrast to the unmarked "u hebt", while other sources list them as equivalents.
- No regional dependency is mentioned in the source, although some differences in frequency of usage for example between [Surinamese Dutch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinamese_Dutch) and current European Dutch are perhaps a possibility.
- [^1]: In a crude analogy, like English "Your Grace has". However, the Dutch usage wasn't and isn't limited to the addressing of dukes. It was a polite way of saying "you have".
#2: Post edited
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2020-12-05T19:32:27Z (almost 4 years ago)
[This article](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/is-er-een-verschil-tussen-u-hebt-en-u-heeft~b63c7501/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[^1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some sources indicate that "u heeft" is now considered markedly formal, while other sources list them as equivalents.- No regional dependency is mentioned in the source, although I suspect that [Surinamese Dutch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinamese_Dutch) still preferentially uses the older form while current European Dutch preferentially uses the newer one.
- [^1]: In a crude analogy, like English "Your Grace has". However, the Dutch usage wasn't and isn't limited to the addressing of dukes. It was a polite way of saying "you have".
- [This article](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/is-er-een-verschil-tussen-u-hebt-en-u-heeft~b63c7501/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[^1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some sources indicate that "u heeft" is now considered formal in contrast to the unmarked "u hebt", while other sources list them as equivalents.
- No regional dependency is mentioned in the source, although I suspect that [Surinamese Dutch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinamese_Dutch) still preferentially uses the older form while current European Dutch preferentially uses the newer one.
- [^1]: In a crude analogy, like English "Your Grace has". However, the Dutch usage wasn't and isn't limited to the addressing of dukes. It was a polite way of saying "you have".
#1: Initial revision
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2020-12-05T19:09:38Z (almost 4 years ago)
[This article](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/is-er-een-verschil-tussen-u-hebt-en-u-heeft~b63c7501/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) explains a shift from 19th century usage of the 3rd person[^1] "heeft" to current day 2nd person "hebt". Both forms currently have the same meaning, both are correct. However, some sources indicate that "u heeft" is now considered markedly formal, while other sources list them as equivalents. No regional dependency is mentioned in the source, although I suspect that [Surinamese Dutch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinamese_Dutch) still preferentially uses the older form while current European Dutch preferentially uses the newer one. [^1]: In a crude analogy, like English "Your Grace has". However, the Dutch usage wasn't and isn't limited to the addressing of dukes. It was a polite way of saying "you have".