Learn Hardcore Dutch: Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan, omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken. - We haven’t been allowed to go out this weekend, because we first had to finish our homework.

In Dutch, modal verbs (like mogen, moeten, kunnen, willen) almost always take hebben as the auxiliary in the perfect tense, even when the main verb would normally take zijn.

Without a modal:
- Wij zijn uitgegaan. – We went out. (perfect of uitgaan → uses zijn)
With a modal in the perfect:
- Wij hebben niet mogen uitgaan. – We were not allowed to go out. (mogen in the perfect → uses hebben)

The rule:
When a sentence is in the perfect tense and contains a modal verb, the auxiliary is normally hebben, not zijn. The main verb appears as an infinitive at the end (uitgaan), not as a past participle (uitgegaan).

What is the difference between “Wij hebben niet mogen uitgaan” and “Wij mochten niet uitgaan”?

Both mean “We were not allowed to go out”, but there is a nuance:

Wij mochten dit weekend niet uitgaan.
- Simple past of mogen.
- Neutral way to describe a past restriction.
- Most commonly used in everyday speech.
Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan.
- Perfect tense of mogen.
- Often highlights the result or completed situation: the fact that the permission was denied and as a result you did not go out.
- Sounds a bit more formal/literary or emphatic in many contexts.

Native speakers often prefer simple past with mogen in spoken language:
Dit weekend mochten we niet uitgaan.

Why is it “niet mogen uitgaan” and can it also be “niet uit mogen gaan”?

Both word orders are possible:

Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan.
Wij hebben dit weekend niet uit mogen gaan.

Differences:

1. …niet mogen uitgaan
- Keeps the separable verb uitgaan together.
- More neutral and somewhat more common in careful written language.
1. …niet uit mogen gaan
- Splits the separable verb uitgaan into uit … gaan, as often happens in Dutch.
- Very common in spoken Dutch; sounds very natural.

Meaning is the same. In clusters with modals and separable verbs, Dutch allows some flexibility in the exact order, as long as:

niet comes before the verb group it negates, and
the pieces of a separable verb (uit
- gaan) stay near each other at the end of the clause.

Why is “uitgaan” written together here instead of split as “uit gaan”?

Uitgaan is a separable verb:

Base form: uitgaan
Finite form in main clause: Ik ga uit.
Infinitive at the end of a clause or verb cluster: the parts are often written together: uitgaan.

In your sentence, uitgaan is an infinitive in a verb cluster (mogen uitgaan), and not the finite verb of a main clause. That’s why we write it as one word:

We hebben niet mogen uitgaan. ✔
We hebben niet mogen uit gaan. ✘ (normally not written this way)

You only split it in main clauses when the verb is conjugated:

We gaan uit.
We gingen gisteren uit.

Why is the verb at the end in “omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken”?

Omdat introduces a subordinate clause in Dutch. In such clauses, the finite verb goes to the end of the clause.

Structure of the subordinate clause:

omdat – subordinating conjunction
we – subject
eerst ons huiswerk – adverb + object
moesten afmaken – verb cluster at the end

So the word order pattern is:

omdat + subject + other stuff + verb(s)

Compare:

Main clause: We moesten eerst ons huiswerk afmaken.
Subordinate: Omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.

What is going on with “moesten afmaken” at the end? Why not just “moesten maken af”?

There are two things happening:

Moesten is the past tense of the modal verb moeten.
Afmaken is a separable verb: afmaken → maakt … af in main clauses.

In a verb cluster with a modal + infinitive of a separable verb:

The modal is conjugated: moesten.
The separable verb stays as a single infinitive: afmaken.
Both go to the end of the subordinate clause: … moesten afmaken.

So:

Main clause: We maken ons huiswerk af.
With modal: We moeten ons huiswerk afmaken.
Subordinate, past: Omdat we ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.

“moesten maken af” is simply incorrect in Dutch.

Why does the sentence use “Wij” in the first clause and “we” in the second? Aren’t they the same?

Yes, “wij” and “we” both mean “we” / “us” as the subject.

Difference:

wij – stressed form, more emphasis or contrast:
- Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan. (maybe contrasting with others)
we – unstressed, more neutral in normal speech.

In your sentence:

Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan,
- Emphasis on we as the ones who were not allowed.
omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.
- No extra emphasis here, so the unstressed we is used.

Both could be wij or both we grammatically; the choice is about emphasis and style, not about grammar.

Why does “dit weekend” come before “niet”?

The typical order in Dutch main clauses is:

[time] – [midfield] – niet – [rest of verb group]

In your sentence:

dit weekend = time expression
niet = negation
mogen uitgaan = rest of the verb group

So we get:

Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan.

If you moved niet before dit weekend, it would sound odd or change the focus:

Wij hebben niet dit weekend mogen uitgaan.
- Sounds like you are contrasting weekends: not this weekend (but another weekend).
- That’s a different meaning.

So time expression before niet is the normal, neutral order here.

Why is it “ons huiswerk” and not “onze huiswerk”?

In Dutch, possessive adjectives (mijn, jouw, zijn, haar, ons, onze, etc.) agree with the gender/number of the noun.

huiswerk is a het-word: het huiswerk.
For het-words in the singular, you use ons, not onze.

So:

ons huiswerk ✔ (our homework)
onze boeken ✔ (our books → plural)
onze huiswerk ✘ (incorrect)

Rule of thumb:

ons
- singular het-word
onze
- all de-words (singular) and all plurals

Why is it “eerst ons huiswerk” instead of “ons huiswerk eerst”?

Both are grammatically possible, but the focus is slightly different:

eerst ons huiswerk
- Emphasizes the order of actions: first homework, then something else.
- Very natural in this kind of sentence:
  - omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.
ons huiswerk eerst
- Slightly more emphasis on the object (“our homework”) being the thing that had to be done first.
- Could be used, but is less common in this specific type of clause.

Native speakers most often say:

We moesten eerst ons huiswerk afmaken.
Omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.

So “eerst ons huiswerk” is simply the most natural order here.

Why is “moesten” in the past tense while the first part is in the perfect (hebben … mogen)? Are the tenses consistent?

Yes, the tenses are consistent and normal.

Main clause: Wij hebben dit weekend niet mogen uitgaan.
- Perfect tense → describes a completed situation in the past (this weekend we were not allowed to go out).
Subordinate clause: omdat we eerst ons huiswerk moesten afmaken.
- Simple past (moesten) → expresses something that was also in the past, at the time of that weekend.

Using a simple past in the subordinate clause with omdat is very normal when telling a past story:

Ik ben thuisgebleven, omdat ik ziek was.
We zijn niet weggegaan, omdat we geen tijd hadden.

You could technically say “omdat we eerst ons huiswerk hebben moeten afmaken”, but that sounds heavier and more formal. The mix perfect in the main clause + simple past in the reason clause is very natural in Dutch.