Dit document dient als officieel bewijs van jouw toestemming.

This document serves as official proof of your permission.

Breakdown of Dit document dient als officieel bewijs van jouw toestemming.

• jouw: your
• dit: this
• van: of
• het document: the document
• dienen als: to serve as
• officieel: official
• het bewijs: the proof
• de toestemming: the permission

Questions & Answers about Dit document dient als officieel bewijs van jouw toestemming.

What does dient als mean and how is it used in this sentence?

dient als literally translates to “serves as.” Here, dienen is the verb (“to serve”), and als introduces the role or function. So “Dit document dient als officieel bewijs” means “This document serves as official proof.”

Why is there no article before officieel bewijs?

In Dutch, when you speak about something in a general or indefinite sense, you often omit the article just as in English you say “serves as official proof,” not “serves as an official proof.” If you wanted to point out a very specific proof, you could say “dient als het officiële bewijs” (with het and -e on officieel), but here it’s meant in a general, indefinite way, so no article is used.

Why doesn’t officieel take an -e ending?

Adjective endings in Dutch depend on:
1) whether the noun is a de-word or het-word,
2) whether the noun is definite (with de/​het) or indefinite (with een or no article).
Here bewijs is a het-word and used indefinitively, so you write officieel bewijs (no -e). If you said het officiële bewijs, you would add -e because it’s definite.

What’s the difference between jouw toestemming, je toestemming, and uw toestemming?

• jouw vs. je: Both are informal possessive pronouns meaning “your,” but jouw is the stressed form (used with emphasis or in writing), while je is unstressed/smaller.
• uw: This is the formal possessive (“your” when speaking politely or to strangers).
  So in an informal setting you could say “je toestemming,” in more formal documents “uw toestemming,” and “jouw toestemming” sits in between (personal, a bit emphatic).

Why is the preposition van used in bewijs van jouw toestemming?

In Dutch, to express “proof of something,” you normally use bewijs van + [object]. The van shows origin or belonging, just like English “proof of your consent.” You wouldn’t say “bewijs voor jouw toestemming” here.

What gender is document, and how do I choose the right article?

document is a het-word in Dutch: you say het document (singular definite) and een document (singular indefinite). In this sentence there is no article because it’s serving a general, functional description (“This document serves as…”).

Could I rewrite it using om + infinitive, like “Dit document dient om jouw toestemming officieel te bewijzen”?

Yes, you can rephrase:
• “Dit document dient om jouw toestemming officieel te bewijzen.”
But notice the nuance:
– Original: focuses on the document’s role (as official proof).
– Rewritten: focuses on the action (to officially prove).
Both are correct, but the first is more direct if you want to emphasize the document’s identity.

How would I pronounce “Dit document dient als officieel bewijs van jouw toestemming”?

Approximate pronunciation in English spelling:
Dit (“dit” as in “dit”)
document (“DOH-koo-mehnt”)
dient (“deent”)
als (“ahls”)
officieel (“oh-fee-SEEL”)
bewijs (“buh-VEYSS”)
van (“vahn”)
jouw (“yow,” rhymes with English “cow”)
toestemming (“too-STAY-ming”)
Put a light stress on officieel, bewijs, and toestemming to sound natural.