Learn Hardcore Dutch: Jammer dat de beamer vandaag niet werkt; we maken kopieën van de presentatie. - Too bad the projector isn’t working today; we’re making copies of the presentation.

Jammer dat … is a common way to express regret, meaning roughly “It’s a pity that …”. It introduces a content clause with dat. The fully explicit version is Het is jammer dat …, which is equally correct. You can also use Helaas (“unfortunately”) as a sentence adverb: Helaas werkt de beamer vandaag niet; we maken kopieën van de presentatie. Don’t use omdat here; omdat means “because” and changes the meaning.

Why is the verb at the end in … dat de beamer vandaag niet werkt?

Because dat introduces a subordinate clause, and in Dutch subordinate clauses the finite verb goes to the end. Compare:

Main clause: De beamer werkt vandaag niet.
Subordinate clause: (Jammer) dat de beamer vandaag niet werkt.

Why is it niet and not geen?

Use niet to negate verbs, adjectives, adverbs, or whole clauses: De beamer werkt niet. Use geen to negate an indefinite noun phrase: We hebben geen beamer (“we don’t have a projector”). In your sentence you’re negating the action “work,” so niet is correct.

Where does vandaag go? Can I say … werkt niet vandaag?

Neutral placement is time before negation:

Main clause: De beamer werkt vandaag niet.
Subordinate clause: … dat de beamer vandaag niet werkt. You can say niet vandaag to contrast (“not today, but another day”): … dat de beamer niet vandaag werkt. In a main clause, De beamer werkt niet vandaag sounds contrastive/marked, not neutral.

What does beamer mean—isn’t that a false friend?

In Dutch, beamer means “data projector.” It’s a very common loanword and it’s a de-word: de/een beamer. Pronunciation is roughly “BAY-mer” with a long “ay” sound.

Can I use projector instead of beamer?

Yes. De projector (or de videoprojector) is fine: Jammer dat de projector vandaag niet werkt. In the Netherlands beamer is extremely common; in Belgium you’ll also hear projector.

Are there other idiomatic ways to say “doesn’t work”?

Yes:

De beamer doet het niet. (very idiomatic: “isn’t working”)
De beamer is stuk/kapot. (“is broken,” implies a fault rather than a temporary glitch)
De beamer functioneert niet (goed). (more formal)

Is the semicolon necessary here?

No. It’s stylistic. You could write:

Two sentences: … niet werkt. We maken kopieën …
With a connector: … niet werkt, dus we maken kopieën … / Daarom maken we kopieën … / We maken kopieën …, want de beamer werkt niet. Avoid a bare comma between two independent clauses without a connector.

Why is it we and not wij?

We is the unstressed, default form of “we.” Wij is the stressed/contrastive form, used for emphasis or contrast: Wij maken kopieën (niet zij). Both are grammatically correct; choose based on emphasis.

Why say we maken kopieën instead of using the verb kopiëren?

Both are fine but differ slightly in focus:

We maken kopieën van de presentatie. emphasizes producing physical copies/handouts.
We kopiëren de presentatie. emphasizes the act of copying the file/content itself. In office contexts both are common. If you mean printing handouts, you might also hear we printen/drukken de presentatie (af).

How do you spell and pronounce kopieën, and why the two dots?

Spelling: kopieën (singular kopie). The diaeresis ë shows that the vowels are in separate syllables: ko-pi-e-en. Pronunciation approx: “ko-PEE-uhn” (IPA: /koːˈpiːən/). Writing kopieen without the diaeresis is common informally online but not standard.

Why is it van de presentatie and not voor de presentatie?

Van means “of/from,” indicating the content: copies of the presentation itself. Voor means “for” (purpose): kopieën voor de presentatie would mean “copies intended for the presentation (event),” not necessarily copies of its content.

Why de presentatie and de beamer—how do I know it’s de?

Presentatie ends in -tie; nouns with -tie/-sie are almost always de-words.
Beamer is a loanword and is conventionally de. Many common loanwords default to de.

The second clause is in the present tense: we maken …. Does that mean the future here?

Yes, Dutch often uses the present for planned/near-future actions. You can make the futurity explicit with zullen or gaan if you want:

We zullen kopieën maken.
We gaan kopieën maken.