Breakdown of We hebben altijd willen weten wat de waarheid is.
zijn
to be
hebben
to have
wij
we
willen
to want
weten
to know
wat
what
altijd
always
de waarheid
the truth
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Dutch grammar and vocabulary.
Questions & Answers about We hebben altijd willen weten wat de waarheid is.
Why does this sentence use hebben as its auxiliary instead of zijn?
In Dutch, most verbs—including those expressing desire or knowing—use hebben in compound tenses. Only verbs of motion (lopen, gaan) or change of state (worden, stijgen) typically take zijn. Since willen weten describes a mental action, it uses hebben.
Why is willen weten left in the infinitive at the end instead of using a past participle like gewild?
Dutch modal verbs (kunnen, willen, moeten, mogen) form the perfect with a “double infinitive” construction: the auxiliary hebben + modal infinitive + main verb infinitive. They don’t normally use their past participle (gewild, gekund, gemoeten). Hence we hebben willen weten rather than we hebben gewild.
Why is altijd placed between hebben and willen?
Adverbs of frequency (altijd, vaak, nooit) sit in the so-called “middle field” of a Dutch clause—after the finite verb (here hebben) but before non-finite verbs (the infinitives). That placement conveys “we have always wanted ….”
Why isn’t there a te before weten?
Modals in Dutch directly govern an infinitive without te. The te-infinitive is used with many other verbs (beslissen te, proberen te), but modals inherently carry that function and drop the te.
Why does the subordinate clause use wat instead of dat to introduce de waarheid is?
This is an indirect question (“to know what …”). In Dutch, indirect questions start with interrogative words (wie, wat, waar, waarom), not dat. Declarative clauses use dat, but here you’re embedding a question.
Why is is at the end of wat de waarheid is rather than in second position?
Subordinate clauses (including indirect questions) follow verb-final word order in Dutch. The finite verb moves to the very end: wat de waarheid is.
Why is the clause wat de waarheid is in the present tense instead of past?
Although the main clause is perfect, the embedded clause expresses a timeless or still-valid truth. You stay in the present because the truth is still true now.
Could you confuse weten with kennen here? Why not say We hebben altijd willen kennen …?
No. kennen means “to be acquainted with” people or things, not “to know facts.” For factual knowledge (“to know what the truth is”), you must use weten.
If I want to stress that I’ve wanted this for a very long time, can I add al as in we hebben altijd al willen weten?
Yes. altijd al emphasizes the duration: “we have always (for a long time) wanted to know ….” It’s a common way to underline that the desire dates back far.