Dutch has two passives, and the second one surprises almost everyone. The familiar worden-passive takes the direct object and makes it the subject: Men biedt hem het boek aan ("They offer him the book") → Het boek wordt hem aangeboden ("The book is offered to him"). But Dutch can also promote the recipient — the indirect object, the person who gets something — to subject, and it does so with krijgen ("to get") plus a past participle: Hij kreeg het boek aangeboden ("He was offered the book"). This is the krijgen-passief, sometimes called the recipient passive or the "get-passive." It exists precisely because Dutch wants a way to put the receiver in the spotlight, and the worden-passive can only spotlight the thing. English does the same job with verbs like give and offer ("he was given a book," "she was offered the job"), but treats it as a quirk of those few verbs. Dutch makes it a general, productive construction — and that's the gap learners need to close.
The form: krijgen + past participle
The recipe is krijgen (conjugated for person and tense) + the past participle of the main verb, which goes to the end of the clause inside the verb bracket. The recipient becomes the grammatical subject; the thing given stays as a direct object in the middle.
| Tense | Form | Example |
|---|---|---|
| present | krijg(t) + participle | Hij krijgt het boek aangeboden. |
| simple past | kreeg(en) + participle | Hij kreeg het boek aangeboden. |
| perfect | heeft ... gekregen + participle | Hij heeft het boek aangeboden gekregen. |
Hij kreeg het boek aangeboden als afscheidscadeau.
He was offered the book as a farewell gift. — recipient 'hij' is the subject; 'het boek' stays as object.
Ze krijgt een prijs uitgereikt voor haar onderzoek.
She's being presented with a prize for her research. — 'krijgen' + 'uitgereikt', recipient promoted.
Ik kreeg het pakketje keurig thuisbezorgd.
I had the parcel delivered neatly to my door. — 'krijgen' + 'thuisbezorgd'.
Notice that krijgen keeps its ordinary meaning "to get/receive" — which is exactly what makes this passive intuitive. You are literally saying the subject got something done for/to them. The participle specifies what was done: aangeboden (offered), uitgereikt (presented), toegestuurd (sent), uitgelegd (explained).
Why Dutch needs it: the worden-passive can't promote the recipient
Take a ditransitive verb — one with both a direct object (a thing) and an indirect object (a person): aanbieden (to offer), geven (to give), toesturen (to send), uitleggen (to explain to). In the active, aanbieden has both: Ze bieden *hem (recipient) het boek (thing) aan. Now suppose you want a passive. The worden-passive can only lift the *direct object — the thing — into the subject slot:
Het boek wordt hem aangeboden.
The book is offered to him. — worden-passive: the THING ('het boek') is the subject; the recipient stays as 'hem'.
But what if the person matters more — if your topic is him, not the book? The worden-passive can't help; it has no way to make the recipient the subject. That's the slot the krijgen-passive fills:
Hij krijgt het boek aangeboden.
He is offered the book. — krijgen-passive: the RECIPIENT ('hij') is the subject; 'het boek' is now the object.
So the two passives are not stylistic variants of each other — they promote different arguments. Het boek wordt aangeboden foregrounds the book; Hij krijgt het boek aangeboden foregrounds the person. Choosing between them is choosing your subject, exactly the choice English makes between "the book was offered to him" and "he was offered the book."
The English parallel — and why it misleads
English actually has this construction, but hides it inside a few verbs and so doesn't flag it as a pattern. "He was given a book," "she was offered the job," "I was sent the wrong form," "we were told to wait" — every one of these makes the recipient the subject, which is structurally the krijgen-passive. The trouble is that English does it with the same auxiliary it uses for the ordinary passive (was), so learners never notice there are two distinct operations. Dutch uses a different verb — krijgen instead of worden — which makes the two passives visibly separate and forces you to choose consciously.
Ze kreeg de baan aangeboden, maar ze heeft bedankt.
She was offered the job, but she turned it down. — English 'was offered' = Dutch 'kreeg aangeboden'.
We kregen te horen dat de vlucht geannuleerd was.
We were told that the flight had been cancelled. — 'krijgen te horen' = 'be told'; a fixed recipient-passive expression.
Ik kreeg het document per ongeluk toegestuurd.
I was accidentally sent the document. — 'kreeg toegestuurd' = 'was sent'.
That last group — te horen krijgen ("to be told"), te zien krijgen ("to be shown / get to see"), te eten krijgen ("to be given to eat") — is a small set of fixed krijgen + te + infinitive idioms worth memorising, because they're extremely common and don't use a participle.
De kinderen kregen warme soep te eten.
The children were given warm soup to eat. — 'te eten krijgen', a fixed recipient idiom.
Krijgen-passive vs worden-passive: a worked contrast
Here is one active sentence and both passives, so you can see the machinery side by side. Active: De directeur reikt de winnaar de prijs uit ("The director presents the winner the prize").
| Version | Sentence | Subject = |
|---|---|---|
| active | De directeur reikt de winnaar de prijs uit. | the director (agent) |
| worden-passive | De prijs wordt aan de winnaar uitgereikt. | the prize (thing) |
| krijgen-passive | De winnaar krijgt de prijs uitgereikt. | the winner (recipient) |
De winnaar kreeg de prijs uitgereikt door de burgemeester.
The winner was presented with the prize by the mayor. — recipient as subject; the agent can still appear with 'door'.
As the example shows, you can still name the agent with door ("by") in the krijgen-passive, just as in the worden-passive. The difference between the two passives is purely which non-agent you promote to subject — the thing or the receiver.
When to reach for krijgen
Use the krijgen-passive whenever the person who receives is your topic and you don't want to name (or stress) the giver. It's especially idiomatic for being given, told, sent, awarded, offered, shown, explained-to, or served something. If instead the thing is the topic — the prize was awarded, the letter was sent — the worden-passive is the natural choice.
Hij krijgt het later allemaal nog uitgelegd door zijn begeleider.
It'll all be explained to him later by his supervisor. — recipient 'hij' as subject, 'krijgen ... uitgelegd'.
Na het ongeluk kreeg ze direct eerste hulp toegediend.
After the accident she was immediately given first aid. — recipient passive, formal register.
Common Mistakes
The main pitfalls: not knowing the construction exists (so defaulting to a clumsy worden-passive when the recipient is the topic), and mixing up which auxiliary promotes which argument.
❌ Hij wordt het boek aangeboden.
Wrong — 'worden' can't promote the recipient. To make the person the subject, use 'krijgen'.
✅ Hij krijgt het boek aangeboden.
He is offered the book.
❌ Ze werd een prijs uitgereikt.
Wrong — same error: 'worden' promotes the thing, not the receiver. The receiver needs 'krijgen'.
✅ Ze kreeg een prijs uitgereikt.
She was presented with a prize.
❌ Ik kreeg gezegd dat de vlucht geannuleerd was.
Wrong idiom — 'be told' is 'te horen krijgen', not 'gezegd krijgen'.
✅ Ik kreeg te horen dat de vlucht geannuleerd was.
I was told the flight had been cancelled.
❌ Het boek krijgt aangeboden.
Wrong — the krijgen-passive promotes the recipient, so its subject must be the PERSON, not the thing. With the thing as subject you want worden: 'Het boek wordt aangeboden.'
✅ Hij krijgt het boek aangeboden.
He is offered the book. — recipient as subject, the thing as object.
Key Takeaways
- Dutch has two passives: worden promotes the direct object (the thing), krijgen promotes the indirect object (the recipient).
- Form: krijgen + past participle at the clause end — Hij kreeg het boek aangeboden. The receiver becomes the subject; the thing stays as object.
- Only verbs with a recipient (give, offer, send, award, explain, tell, show) allow it. The agent can still appear with door.
- English does this only with give-type verbs ("he was given a book") and hides it behind the same auxiliary; Dutch makes it a separate, productive construction with its own verb, krijgen. Note the fixed idioms te horen / te zien / te eten krijgen.
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
- The Passive with WordenB1 — How Dutch builds the dynamic, process passive with worden plus a past participle — De brief wordt geschreven — and why this 'something is being done' passive is grammatically separate from the resulting-state passive with zijn.
- Krijgen (to get/receive) — Full ConjugationA2 — The complete paradigm of krijgen (to get/receive): present, the ij→ee past kreeg/kregen, participle gekregen, perfect with hebben, imperative — plus the krijgen-passive, Dutch's special 'recipient passive' (hij kreeg het boek aangeboden).
- Spoken vs Written DutchB1 — The wide gap between Dutch as it is spoken and Dutch as it is written. Speech runs on reduced forms ('t, 'm, 'r, ie, 'k), ellipsis, modal particles and dislocation; writing runs on full forms, explicit connectives, nominal style and complex subordination. How to recognise each register and why writing as you speak — or speaking as you write — both go wrong.
- Journalistic StyleB2 — The register of Dutch news writing — telegraphic headlines ('koppen') in the present tense with dropped articles and auxiliaries, the lead that packs who/what/where/when, the worden-passive, attribution via 'volgens' and 'aldus', and the crucial 'zou ... hebben' that marks a claim as unverified hearsay rather than future. How to read and write the news.