Learn Hardcore Dutch: De vuilnisbak zit vol, dus hij brengt de zak naar buiten. - The trash can is full, so he takes the bag outside.

In Dutch, you often use posture verbs like zitten, staan, liggen, hangen instead of zijn (to be) when talking about how something is positioned or how full it is.

De vuilnisbak zit vol literally: “The trash can sits full”
Idiomatic meaning: “The trash can is full.”

For containers that are filled up inside, zitten is common:

De tas zit vol. – The bag is full.
Mijn zakken zitten vol. – My pockets are full.

You can say De vuilnisbak is vol, and it’s correct, but zit vol is more natural and specific here.

Could you explain the literal meaning of De vuilnisbak zit vol and why it still sounds natural in Dutch?

Word by word:

De vuilnisbak – the trash can / bin
zit – sits
vol – full

So literally: “The trash can sits full.”

Dutch uses zitten to describe the state of being filled inside an object, as if the contents are “sitting” in it. Native speakers don’t feel this as strange; it’s simply the idiomatic way to describe a full container.

So while the English sounds odd literally, the Dutch feels as natural as “is full.”

Why is it hij brengt and not something like hij neemt (“he takes”)? Aren’t both “brings” and “takes” possible?

Dutch distinguishes brengen and nemen in a similar way to English bring vs take:

brengen = move something toward another place/person, often with the destination in focus
nemen / meenemen = take (along) something, more from the starting point perspective

In hij brengt de zak naar buiten, the focus is on getting the bag to outside (the destination). That fits brengen well.

You could say:

Hij neemt de zak mee naar buiten. – He takes the bag outside (with him).

That’s also correct, but it slightly emphasizes the idea of taking it along rather than just delivering it.

Why do we say naar buiten and not just buiten?

Dutch distinguishes location vs direction:

buiten on its own usually describes location:
- De zak staat buiten. – The bag is (standing) outside.
naar buiten describes movement toward outside:
- Hij gaat naar buiten. – He goes outside.
- Hij brengt de zak naar buiten. – He brings the bag outside.

Here it’s about moving the bag to the outside, so you need the directional phrase naar buiten.

Could we say Hij zet de zak buiten instead of Hij brengt de zak naar buiten?

Yes, that’s a very natural alternative, especially in everyday speech:

Hij zet de zak buiten. – He puts the bag outside.

Differences in nuance:

brengen naar buiten focuses on moving/carrying the bag to the outside.
zetten focuses on placing it somewhere (usually upright on the ground).

Both are correct and commonly used about trash bags.

Why is it de vuilnisbak and de zak, not het vuilnisbak or het zak?

In Dutch, every noun has a grammatical gender:

de-words (common gender) use de
het-words (neuter) use het

Both vuilnisbak (trash can) and zak (bag) are de-words:

de vuilnisbak
de zak

There’s no rule you can reliably derive this from for every noun; it’s mostly something you have to learn with each word:

de tas (bag), de emmer (bucket), de doos (box)
but het glas (glass), het blik (can/tin)

Why do we say de zak and not een zak? What makes it definite?

De zak refers to a specific, known bag: the one that is already in that trash can.

The logic is:

We know which trash can: De vuilnisbak (the trash can).
Inside that bin there is a particular trash bag.
So when we say de zak, it naturally means “the (trash) bag that’s in that bin.”

You could say:

De vuilnisbak zit vol, dus hij brengt een zak naar buiten.

…but that would normally mean he takes some bag outside (not necessarily the one from that specific bin), which changes the meaning.

What exactly does dus do here, and why is the word order dus hij brengt and not dus brengt hij?

Here dus means “so / therefore” and links two main clauses:

De vuilnisbak zit vol,
dus hij brengt de zak naar buiten.

In this use, dus is a coordinating conjunction, like en, maar, of. With coordinating conjunctions, the next clause keeps normal main-clause word order:

subject first: hij
then the verb: brengt

So: dus hij brengt …, not necessarily dus brengt hij ….

You can sometimes hear Dus brengt hij de zak naar buiten, especially when dus is used more like a sentence adverb (“so / therefore”), but the most straightforward version after a comma like this is dus hij brengt ….

What’s the difference between dus and omdat if I wanted to change the sentence?

dus = so / therefore, expresses a result or consequence
omdat = because, introduces a reason

Original:

De vuilnisbak zit vol, dus hij brengt de zak naar buiten.
→ The bin is full, so he takes the bag outside. (full → action)

If you flip the logic:

Hij brengt de zak naar buiten, omdat de vuilnisbak vol zit.
→ He takes the bag outside because the bin is full. (action → reason)

With omdat, the clause it introduces has subordinate word order:
… omdat de vuilnisbak vol zit (verb at the end).

Is hij referring to the trash can (de vuilnisbak) or to a person? Could it be ambiguous?

Grammatically, de vuilnisbak is a de-word, so it could take hij as a pronoun. But in this sentence:

De vuilnisbak zit vol, dus hij brengt de zak naar buiten.

the only thing that can bring the bag outside in a realistic way is a person, so native speakers immediately interpret hij as “he” (a man/boy).

If you wanted to avoid any ambiguity in a context where it matters, you might specify:

De vuilnisbak zit vol, dus de man brengt de zak naar buiten. – The bin is full, so the man takes the bag outside.

Where else can naar buiten go in the sentence? Is Hij brengt naar buiten de zak possible?

Natural word orders include:

Hij brengt de zak naar buiten. (neutral)
Hij brengt de zak nu naar buiten. (adding nu)
Hij brengt nu de zak naar buiten. (focus on now)

But Hij brengt naar buiten de zak is ungrammatical in standard Dutch. You generally keep:

Verb (brengt)
Direct object (de zak)
Place/time adverbials (naar buiten, nu, morgen, etc.)

So: brengt + de zak + naar buiten, not brengt + naar buiten + de zak.

Is naar buiten brengen a fixed expression or a separable verb like buitenbrengen?

In the sentence:

… hij brengt de zak naar buiten.

brengen is the main verb, and naar buiten is just a normal prepositional phrase (direction).

There is a separable verb buitenbrengen (“to bring outside”), but it’s:

Hij brengt de zak buiten.
(base form: buitenbrengen)

Here:

naar buiten brengen = verb + prepositional phrase
buitenbrengen = one separable verb

Both are correct Dutch, but naar buiten brengen sounds a bit more neutral and explicit about the direction.