Breakdown of De nieuwe kandidaat van de partij moest ergens voor vechten.
nieuw
new
ergens
somewhere
moeten
to have to, must
voor
for (on behalf of)
Questions & Answers about De nieuwe kandidaat van de partij moest ergens voor vechten.
Why does the sentence use ergens voor instead of "voor iets" (for something)?
In Dutch, when you combine a preposition like voor (for) with the word iets (something), they merge into a special combination. Iets changes into ergens and jumps in front of the preposition. So, you must say ergens voor rather than "voor iets".
Can I write ergens voor as a single word?
Yes, writing it as one word (ergensvoor) is grammatically correct. However, it is very common to write them as two separate words (ergens voor), especially in sentences where other words might sit between them.
Why is vechten (to fight) all the way at the end of the sentence?
This happens because of the modal verb moest (had to). In Dutch, the conjugated modal verb takes the standard second position in the sentence, which pushes the main action verb (vechten) all the way to the end.
What tense is the verb moest?
Moest is the simple past tense of moeten (must / to have to) for singular subjects like de nieuwe kandidaat. In this sentence, it translates to "had to".
Why is there an -e on the end of ?