Learn Hardcore Dutch: De auto is groot genoeg om de kinderen op de achterbank te zetten. - The car is big enough to put the children on the back seat.

Dutch uses the pattern adjective + genoeg + om te + infinitive to express “enough to do X.” Here, groot genoeg om ... te zetten means “big enough to put ...”. The om is required in this construction; leaving it out sounds wrong. Examples:

Het is warm genoeg om buiten te zitten.
Ze is oud genoeg om alleen thuis te blijven.

Who is actually doing the action in om de kinderen … te zetten? The car?

No. In this kind of om te-clause, the subject is understood (generic “you/we/one”), not the car. English works the same: “The car is big enough to put the kids in the back.” If you want to make the doer explicit, you can add voor + noun/pronoun:

De auto is groot genoeg voor ons om de kinderen op de achterbank te zetten.

What is the word order inside the om … te clause?

Complements (objects, prepositional phrases) typically come before te + infinitive:

om de kinderen op de achterbank te zetten (object + PP + te + verb) You might see om de kinderen te zetten op de achterbank, which is possible but less natural; most speakers keep op de achterbank close to zetten. With a pronoun: om ze op de achterbank te zetten. The te + verb stays at the end of the mini-clause.

Why is it op de achterbank and not in de achterbank?

Seats are treated as surfaces in Dutch, so you sit or put someone op (on) a seat: op de achterbank. Use achterin (de auto) when you mean “in the back (area) of the car”:

De kinderen zitten achterin (de auto).
We zetten de kinderen op de achterbank.

What’s the difference between zetten and zitten here?

zetten = to put/place (transitive; needs an object): We zetten de kinderen op de achterbank.
zitten = to sit (intransitive): De kinderen zitten op de achterbank. Alternatives: neerzetten (“set down”) or the more formal plaatsen (“to place”): … om de kinderen op de achterbank te plaatsen.

Could I say … om de kinderen op de achterbank te laten zitten instead?

Yes. … te zetten focuses on the act of seating/placing them there. … te laten zitten means “to let them sit (there)”—it emphasizes permission or leaving them in that position rather than the act of putting them there.

Why de kinderen? Could I drop the article and just say kinderen?

De kinderen refers to specific, known children (e.g., your kids). If you say … om kinderen op de achterbank te zetten, it means “children” in general or some children, which changes the nuance. Both are grammatical; choose based on specificity.

If I replace de kinderen with a pronoun, which form should I use?

Use object ze (unstressed) in everyday speech: … om ze op de achterbank te zetten. Formal/stressed direct object is hen: … om hen op de achterbank te zetten. Do not use hun here; in standard Dutch hun is (only) the indirect-object form.

Why is it groot genoeg, not genoeg groot?

With adjectives, genoeg normally follows: adjective + genoeg (e.g., lang genoeg, oud genoeg, groot genoeg). Genoeg groot is unusual in modern standard Dutch. A common synonym is voldoende groot (“sufficiently big”).

Can I leave out om and say … groot genoeg de kinderen … te zetten?

No—after an adjective + genoeg, you need om … te. Compare:

Correct: groot genoeg om … te zetten
Incorrect: groot genoeg … te zetten Note that there are other patterns where om does not appear, e.g., een makkelijk te lezen boek or We hebben genoeg te doen, but those are different constructions.

Is achterbank one word, and which article does it take?

Yes, Dutch compounds are written as one word: achterbank (“back seat”). It takes de (because bank is a common-gender noun): de achterbank. Plural: de achterbanken.

Is kinderen an irregular plural?

Yes. kind → kinderen (not “kinds”). This is a common irregular plural in Dutch.

Does the sentence imply we’re actually going to do it now, or just that it’s possible?

It primarily states capacity/sufficiency (“The car is big enough for that action”). It doesn’t by itself say the action will happen now; context decides whether it’s a plan or just a statement of possibility.

Is there an alternative with zo … dat …?

Yes. You can say:

De auto is zo groot dat we de kinderen op de achterbank kunnen zetten.
Or focusing on the kids’ position: De auto is zo groot dat de kinderen achterin kunnen zitten. This expresses the result rather than the purpose.

Could this be confused with the separable verb opzetten?

No. Here, op de achterbank is a prepositional phrase with zetten (“put [someone] on [the seat]”). The separable verb opzetten means “to put on” (a hat, glasses) or “to set up.” Saying … om de kinderen op te zetten would mean “to put the children on (something)” and would be odd without specifying what. The correct reading is zetten … op de achterbank.