Learn Hardcore Dutch: De vuilnisbak zit weer vol, dus we moeten de zak naar buiten brengen. - The trash can is full again, so we have to take the bag outside.

In Dutch, zitten is often used with containers or spaces that are filled with something. It literally means “to sit”, but in this context it means “to be filled / to contain”.

De vuilnisbak zit vol. = The trash can is (all) full (filled up inside).
Er zit water in de fles. = There is water in the bottle.
Mijn tas zit vol boeken. = My bag is full of books.

You can say “De vuilnisbak is weer vol” and it is correct Dutch, but:

zit vol → more colloquial, emphasizes the inside being filled up
is vol → more neutral, just says that its state is “full”

In everyday speech about trash cans, zit vol is very common and sounds natural.

Is “De vuilnisbak is weer vol” also correct, and does it sound different from “zit weer vol”?

Yes, “De vuilnisbak is weer vol” is absolutely correct.

De vuilnisbak zit weer vol.
More informal/colloquial; suggests a container that is “filled up”.
De vuilnisbak is weer vol.
Slightly more neutral; simply states the condition “full”.

In practice, both are used. If you want totally safe, neutral Dutch, is vol is fine. If you want to sound more naturally conversational, zit vol fits very well here.

What exactly does “weer” mean here? Is it the same as “opnieuw”?

Weer means “again” or “once more” in this sentence:

De vuilnisbak zit weer vol = The trash can is full again.

Nuance:

weer is the everyday, neutral “again” and often carries a tone of mild annoyance in contexts like this (you’re a bit tired of having to empty it).
opnieuw can also mean “again”, but is often used for doing something once more from the start:
- Doe het opnieuw. = Do it again (repeat it from the beginning).

Here opnieuw would sound unnatural; native speakers say weer vol in this kind of sentence.

Why is it “dus we moeten …” and not “dus moeten we …”? Are both possible?

Both word orders are grammatically possible, but they have slightly different feels.

…, dus we moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.
- dus is a coordinating conjunction here (like “so” / “therefore”).
- After a coordinating conjunction, Dutch keeps normal subject–verb order:
  - we moeten (we must).
Dus moeten we de zak naar buiten brengen.
- Here dus is more like an adverb at the beginning of the sentence.
- Dutch main clauses put the finite verb in second position, so:
  - Dus (1st) moeten (2nd) we (3rd).

Meaning-wise they are almost the same, but:

…, dus we moeten … feels like a calm, neutral continuation.
Dus moeten we … can sound a bit more formal or emphatic, like drawing a conclusion.

In your example, “…, dus we moeten …” is the most natural choice.

Why is “moeten” in the middle and “brengen” at the end: “we moeten de zak naar buiten brengen”?

This is a typical Dutch modal verb + main verb structure.

moeten = a modal verb (“must / have to”)
brengen = the main action verb (“to bring”)

The rules:

In a main clause, the finite verb (the conjugated one) goes in second position:
- we moeten … (“we must …”)
Any other verb(s) (infinitives) are pushed to the end of the clause:
- … naar buiten brengen.

So the structure is:

Subject: we
Finite verb: moeten
Object + other info: de zak naar buiten
Main verb (infinitive) at the end: brengen

This pattern is extremely common in Dutch:

Ik wil Nederlands leren.
Ze kan goed zwemmen.
We moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.

What is the difference between “we moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.” and “Moeten we de zak naar buiten brengen?”

The difference is statement vs. question. Word order and intonation change:

We moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.
- Normal statement.
- Subject first: we, then verb: moeten.
- English: We have to take the bag outside.
Moeten we de zak naar buiten brengen?
- Yes/no question.
- Verb comes first: Moeten, then subject: we.
- Rising intonation on the question.

So simply moving moeten in front of we changes it from a statement to a question, just like in English (We must… → Must we…?).

Why is it “de zak” and not “het zak”?

In Dutch, every noun has a grammatical gender that determines whether you use de or het:

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

Zak (bag/sack) is a de-word, so you must say:

de zak (the bag)
een zak (a bag)

Het zak is incorrect. You simply have to memorize the article for each new noun.

Does “zak” specifically mean a trash bag? Why not say “vuilniszak”?

Zak by itself just means “bag” / “sack” in general.

In context, when talking about a trash can, de zak almost always refers to the trash bag inside. The meaning is clear from the situation.

You can also be more explicit and say:

We moeten de vuilniszak naar buiten brengen.
= We have to take the trash bag outside.

Both are correct:

de zak → the (known) bag, context says it’s trash.
de vuilniszak → explicitly “trash bag”.

In everyday conversation at home, de zak is very natural.

What’s the difference between “naar buiten brengen” and “buiten zetten”?

Both can be used for trash, but they focus on different aspects:

naar buiten brengen
- Literally: “to bring to outside”.
- Emphasizes the movement from inside to outside.
- Very transparent for learners.
buiten zetten
- Literally: “to put outside”.
- Emphasizes placing or setting something outside.
- Very common in the context of trash:
  - Ik moet de vuilniszak buiten zetten.
    = I have to put the trash bag outside (e.g. on the curb).

Native speakers might say either, but buiten zetten is a very typical phrase when speaking about putting trash out for collection.

Why is it “naar buiten” and not just “buiten”?

Buiten by itself is mainly a location (“outside”), while naar buiten expresses movement to the outside:

buiten = (being) outside
- De vuilnisbak staat buiten. = The trash can is (standing) outside.
naar buiten = to the outside (direction)
- We brengen de zak naar buiten. = We bring the bag (to the) outside.

In your sentence, the bag is being moved from inside to outside, so naar buiten is the natural choice.

Why is the subject “we” and not “wij”? What’s the difference?

Both we and wij mean “we / us”, but:

we = the unstressed, normal form
wij = the stressed / emphatic form

Examples:

We moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.
Neutral: We have to take the bag outside.
Wij moeten de zak naar buiten brengen (niet zij).
Emphatic: We (and not they) have to take the bag outside.

In most everyday speech, people use we unless they want to emphasize the pronoun. So we is the default in your sentence.

How do you pronounce “vuilnisbak”, and where is the stress?

Vuilnisbak is pronounced approximately as:

[ˈvœyl.nɪs.bɑk]
Rough English approximation: “vuil” like “foil” but with your lips more rounded; “nis” like “nis” in “business”; “bak” like “buck”.

Stress pattern:

Main stress is on the first syllable: VUIL-nis-bak.

Syllables:

vuil – 1st syllable (stressed)
nis – 2nd
bak – 3rd

So you say it as one word with the accent at the start: VUIL-nis-bak.

Are there other common words for “vuilnisbak”?

Yes, Dutch has several everyday words for a trash can:

vuilnisbak – very common, general “trash can / garbage can”
prullenbak – often used for smaller indoor bins (office, bathroom, etc.)
afvalbak – a bit more neutral/formal; afval = waste

In your sentence, vuilnisbak is perfectly natural and widely understood. If you changed it to prullenbak, the sentence would still work, especially for an indoor bin:

De prullenbak zit weer vol, dus we moeten de zak naar buiten brengen.