Learn Hardcore Dutch: Anna heeft haar veters al vast en zet de mand bij de deur. - Anna already has her shoelaces tied and places the basket by the door.

As a state: haar veters (zitten) vast = her shoelaces are tied/secure. With al, this very naturally reads as “already tied.”
As an action of holding: iets vasthebben = to be holding something. So Anna heeft haar veters (al) vast can also mean “Anna is (already) holding her laces.”

In everyday context, especially before leaving the house, je veters al vast (hebben/zitten) is commonly understood as “your laces are already tied.” If you want to be unambiguously about holding, say Anna houdt haar veters (al) vast. If you want to be unambiguously about the tied state, say Haar veters zitten al vast or Haar veters zijn al gestrikt.

Is this using the separable verb vasthebben?

It can be parsed that way, yes. Vasthebben is separable: present tense looks like heb(ben) … vast (e.g., Ik heb hem vast = I’m holding him). The perfect is vastgehad (e.g., Ze heeft hem vastgehad).

However, in the “tied/secure” reading, vast functions as a predicative complement about the laces’ state, not as a particle of the verb. So:

Holding: Anna heeft haar veters (al) vast ≈ “is holding her laces.”
Tied/secure: Anna heeft haar veters al vast ≈ “already has her laces tied/secure.”

Context decides; the “tied” reading is the likelier one here.

What does al mean here, and is its position correct?

Al means “already.” The placement … haar veters al vast is natural. You’ll typically place al after the verb and before the phrase it semantically affects.

Be careful: al can also mean “all” when it precedes a possessive + noun, as in al haar veters = “all her laces.” That’s a different meaning from “already.”

Is al vast the same as the single word alvast?

No.

al vast (two words) = “already secure/tight” (here: referring to the laces’ state).
alvast (one word) = “in advance/for now/early.” Example: Ik strik mijn veters alvast = I’ll tie my laces in advance.

You would not write Anna heeft haar veters alvast in this sentence; you’d need a participle like … alvast gestrikt to make sense.

Why does the second part start with zet right after en? Isn’t Dutch verb-second?

It is verb-second. This is a coordinated clause with the same subject as the first clause. Dutch allows you to drop the repeated subject in coordination (a kind of “gapping”). Understood fully, it’s:

Anna heeft haar veters al vast en (Anna) zet de mand bij de deur. You could also write the subject again: … en Anna zet … Both are correct.

Does zet mean “sits”? What’s the difference between zetten and zitten?

zetten = to set/put/place (transitive; you put something somewhere). Here: Anna zet de mand …
zitten = to sit/to be seated (intransitive; no direct object). A person or object can zitten somewhere.

So zet does not mean “sits”; it’s “puts/places.”

Could I say zet … neer instead of just zet?

Yes. Neerzetten emphasizes “put down” (the downward motion/act of setting something down).

Anna zet de mand bij de deur = she places the basket by the door.
Anna zet de mand bij de deur neer = she puts the basket down by the door (slightly more dynamic).

Both are idiomatic here.

Should it be zet or legt for a basket?

Use depends on the object’s final orientation:

zetten: place something so it “stands” (upright). A basket normally “stands,” so zet is standard.
leggen: lay something so it “lies” (on its side/flat). If she puts the basket on its side, legt would fit.
Neutral/official: plaatsen (to place), but that can sound a bit formal.

Why bij de deur and not naast/aan/voor de deur?

They differ in nuance:

bij de deur: at/near the door (general proximity).
naast de deur: next to the door (immediately adjacent).
voor de deur: in front of the door; often literally blocking or outside the door.
aan de deur: at the door in the sense of “at the doorway/doorbell area” or physically attached to the door (e.g., a wreath aan de deur).

Here, bij de deur is the broad, safe choice for “by the door.”

Is haar here “her” or “hair”? How do I tell?

Haar can be the possessive pronoun “her” or the noun “hair.” In this sentence it’s the possessive:

haar veters = her laces. If it referred to hair, you would expect a hair-related noun: haar haar literally means “her hair,” but stylistically you’d often say haar haar or just haar when context is clear.

Why is it plural veters?

Shoes typically come in a pair and shoelaces are normally talked about in the plural in Dutch: je veters. Even when one lace is loose, people often still say Je veters zitten los. Singular veter exists, but the plural is more idiomatic here.

What’s the article gender for mand and deur? And what about diminutives?

mand and deur are common-gender nouns: de mand, de deur.
Diminutives take het regardless of the base noun’s gender:
- het mandje (little basket)
- het deurtje (little door)

Are there more explicit ways to say “shoelaces are tied”?

Yes:

Anna heeft haar veters al gestrikt. (uses the tying verb)
Anna heeft haar veters al vastgemaakt.
Haar veters zitten al vast. (state/result) All clearly express that the laces are tied/secured.

Do I need a comma before en here?

Usually no. Dutch typically omits the comma before en in simple coordination:

Anna heeft … vast en zet … A comma can appear if clauses are long/complex or to avoid ambiguity, but it’s not required here.

Is heeft here an auxiliary (present perfect), or just “has”?

Here it’s the main verb hebben (“to have/possess/be in a state”), not an auxiliary for a perfect tense—there’s no past participle. Compare:

State: Ze heeft haar veters al vast.
Perfect of a separable verb (holding): Ze heeft haar veters vastgehad.

Can I move al elsewhere? Any pitfalls?

Anna heeft haar veters al vast. = “already” (good).
Anna heeft al haar veters vast. Here al haar is read as “all her,” i.e., “all her laces,” which changes the meaning.
To keep the “already” meaning, don’t put al directly before haar veters. If you need to front something else, keep al near the predicate: Haar veters heeft Anna al vast (marked, but preserves “already”).

How do I pronounce tricky bits like deur, veters, and zet?

Quick tips:

deur: Dutch eu is like the vowel in English “sir” (but rounded); the final r is often light.
veters: stress on the first syllable: VEE-tərs; Dutch e in the second syllable is a schwa.
zet: like English “z” + “set,” short vowel.