Openen ("to open"), sluiten ("to close") and beginnen ("to start") are a useful trio to learn together precisely because they don't behave alike — they show you three different verb patterns in one breath. Openen is a clean weak verb (opende/geopend). Sluiten is strong (sloot/gesloten). And beginnen is strong too (begon/begonnen), but it carries two extra surprises that catch out almost every English speaker: it forms its perfect with zijn, not hebben (ik ben begonnen), and because it starts with the unstressed prefix be-, its past participle takes no ge- (begonnen, never gebegonnen). This page lays out all three so the contrasts are unmistakable.
Principal parts
| Infinitive | Meaning | Past (sg.) | Past (pl.) | Past participle | Auxiliary | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| openen | to open | opende | openden | geopend | hebben | weak |
| sluiten | to close | sloot | sloten | gesloten | hebben | strong |
| beginnen | to start / begin | begon | begonnen | begonnen | zijn | strong (be-) |
Three verbs, three lessons: openen shows the weak -de/ge-…-d pattern, sluiten shows a strong ui → oo → o ablaut, and beginnen shows a strong i → o → o ablaut plus the be- prefix rule plus the zijn auxiliary.
Openen — the weak one
Openen is regular. The stem is open- (it already ends in -en as part of the root, which is unusual but harmless). Add weak -de for the past, and ge- + stem + -d for the participle. The 't kofschip rule picks -de here because the stem ends in the voiced -n.
| Tense | Form | English |
|---|---|---|
| present (ik) | ik open | I open |
| present (hij) | hij opent | he opens |
| past (sg.) | ik opende | I opened |
| past (pl.) | wij openden | we opened |
| perfect | ik heb geopend | I have opened |
Note the participle geopend: ge- + open + -d, and the spelling stays single-p because the stem syllable o·pe is open. In everyday speech the simple verb opendoen ("to open the door") is even more common than bare openen: Doe je even de deur open?
Ik open de gordijnen elke ochtend zodra ik wakker word.
I open the curtains every morning as soon as I wake up. — present, weak verb 'open'.
De winkel heeft vandaag pas om tien uur geopend.
The shop only opened at ten o'clock today. — perfect, weak participle 'geopend' with hebben.
Sluiten — the strong one
Sluiten is strong, class 2, with the ablaut ui → oo → o: present sluit, past sloot/sloten, participle gesloten. There is no -te or -de anywhere — a regularised sluitte or gesluit would be wrong.
| Tense | Form | English |
|---|---|---|
| present (ik) | ik sluit | I close |
| present (hij) | hij sluit | he closes |
| past (sg.) | ik sloot | I closed |
| past (pl.) | wij sloten | we closed |
| perfect | ik heb gesloten | I have closed |
The singular past sloot has a long oo closed by the t; the plural sloten opens the syllable (slo·ten) and keeps the long vowel with a single o. The participle gesloten doubles as an adjective: een gesloten deur ("a closed door"), de winkel is gesloten ("the shop is closed").
De grenzen sloten van de ene op de andere dag.
The borders closed from one day to the next. — strong past 'sloten' (plural).
Heb je de achterdeur al gesloten?
Have you closed the back door yet? — perfect, strong participle 'gesloten' with hebben.
Beginnen — the one with three traps
Beginnen is strong (class 3, i → o → o): begin → begon/begonnen → begonnen. But the headline facts for English speakers are the two things that aren't about the vowel.
Trap 1 — the auxiliary is zijn. Beginnen describes entering a new state (an action coming into being), so it joins the change-of-state family that takes zijn: Ik *ben begonnen, never *Ik heb begonnen. English uses "have" here ("I have started"), so this feels deeply unnatural and is the single most common error.
Trap 2 — no ge- on the participle. Dutch drops the ge- prefix from participles of verbs beginning with an unstressed prefix: be-, ge-, ver-, ont-, her-, er-, mis-. Because beginnen starts with be-, its participle is just begonnen — and crucially, the participle is identical to the plural past. There is no gebegonnen.
| Tense | Form | English |
|---|---|---|
| present (ik) | ik begin | I start |
| present (hij) | hij begint | he starts |
| past (sg.) | ik begon | I started |
| past (pl.) | wij begonnen | we started |
| perfect | ik ben begonnen | I have started |
De film is al begonnen, we zijn te laat.
The film has already started, we're too late. — beginnen takes zijn: 'is begonnen'.
Ik ben vorige maand met een nieuwe cursus begonnen.
I started a new course last month. — 'ben ... begonnen', zijn + no-ge participle.
Beginnen + complement: te, met, or aan
How you attach what you're starting matters, and Dutch offers three frames:
| Frame | Use | Example |
|---|---|---|
beginnen te
| start to do an action | Het begint te regenen. |
beginnen met
| start with a thing/activity | We beginnen met de soep. |
beginnen aan
| embark on a task/project | Ik begin aan mijn scriptie. |
Use beginnen te for a sudden onset of an action (Ze begon te huilen — "she started to cry"). Use beginnen met to mark the first step of a sequence (Laten we beginnen met de introductie). Use beginnen aan for taking on something substantial (Hij is aan een nieuw boek begonnen).
Plotseling begon de baby te lachen.
Suddenly the baby started to laugh. — beginnen te + infinitive.
We zijn aan een grote verbouwing begonnen.
We've started a big renovation. — beginnen aan + noun, perfect with zijn.
Common Mistakes
❌ Ik heb gisteren met mijn nieuwe baan begonnen.
Incorrect auxiliary — beginnen takes zijn: 'Ik ben ... begonnen'.
✅ Ik ben gisteren met mijn nieuwe baan begonnen.
I started my new job yesterday.
❌ De vergadering is al gebegonnen.
Incorrect — the be- prefix means no ge-: the participle is 'begonnen'.
✅ De vergadering is al begonnen.
The meeting has already started.
❌ Wij begon om negen uur.
Incorrect — the plural needs 'begonnen', not the singular 'begon'.
✅ Wij begonnen om negen uur.
We started at nine o'clock.
❌ Ik heb de deur gesluit.
Incorrect — sluiten is strong; the participle is 'gesloten', not 'gesluit'.
✅ Ik heb de deur gesloten.
I closed the door.
❌ De winkel heeft om negen uur geopen.
Incorrect — the weak participle of openen is 'geopend', with -d.
✅ De winkel heeft om negen uur geopend.
The shop opened at nine o'clock.
Key Takeaways
- openen is weak: opende / geopend, with hebben.
- sluiten is strong (ui–oo–o): sloot / sloten / gesloten, with hebben; never sluitte or gesluit.
- beginnen is strong (i–o–o): begon / begonnen / begonnen, and it has two traps — it takes zijn (ik ben begonnen) and its participle has no ge- (the be- prefix), so it equals the plural past.
- Attach what you start with te (sudden action), met (first step), or aan (big undertaking).
Now practice Dutch
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Dutch→Related Topics
- Verb Reference: How to Use These TablesA2 — A guide to reading the verb-reference pages: what each conjugation table shows (present, simple past, perfect with its auxiliary, participle), how strong/weak/mixed verbs are labelled, why the auxiliary is flagged, and which verbs to master first.
- The Regular Weak Verb: Full ParadigmA2 — The complete model paradigm of a regular Dutch weak verb (werken and maken) across every tense — present, simple past, present perfect, past perfect, future and conditional — plus the stem→present→past→participle pipeline and the 't kofschip rule that decides between -te and -de.
- Strong Verbs: Vowel Change in the PastB1 — How Dutch strong verbs form the simple past by changing the stem vowel, and how their past participle ends in -en — including the singular/plural vowel split that most resources leave out.
- Weak Past: The 't Kofschip Rule (-te vs -de)A2 — How to form the weak simple past in Dutch and how the 't kofschip rule decides between the endings -te(n) and -de(n) — applied to the underlying stem consonant, not the infinitive.
- Hebben or Zijn in the PerfectB1 — Most Dutch verbs build the perfect with hebben, but verbs of change of state or location — and motion verbs once a destination is named — switch to zijn, following a deep telicity logic English has no equivalent for.