Learn Hardcore Dutch: Ik vraag me af of deze schrijver zelf ook zo'n karakter heeft. - I wonder whether this author himself also has such a personality.

In Dutch, zich afvragen is a reflexive verb meaning “to wonder”.
Literally, ik vraag me af is “I ask myself [off]”, but idiomatically it just means “I wonder”.

Correct:
- Ik vraag me af of… = I wonder whether…
Incorrect:
- Ik vraag af of… (you must include the reflexive pronoun)

You can occasionally see ik vraag het me af (“I ask it to myself”), but ik vraag me af is far more common in everyday language.

Why is of used here, and not als?

In this sentence, of means “if / whether”, not “or”.

You use of (meaning if/whether) after verbs that express:

doubt: twijfelen of…
wondering: zich afvragen of…
not knowing: weten of…

So:

Ik vraag me af of deze schrijver…
= I wonder if/whether this writer…

Als is for conditional “if/when” in the sense of “on the condition that”:

Als het regent, blijf ik thuis. = If it rains, I stay home.

So you cannot say ik vraag me af als… in this meaning.

Why does the verb heeft go to the end of the sentence?

The part starting with of is a subordinate clause (introduced by of).

In Dutch:

Main clause: the finite verb is in second position.
- Ik vraag me af… → vraag is in second place.
Subordinate clause: the finite verb goes to the end.
- …of deze schrijver zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft.

So the structure is:

Ik vraag me af (main clause)
of deze schrijver zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft (subordinate clause, verb-final)

You cannot say:

✗ …of deze schrijver heeft zelf ook zo’n karakter. (wrong order in a subordinate clause)

What exactly does zo’n mean, and how is it different from zo een or zo een karakter?

Zo’n is a contraction of zo een and means “such a / so … a”.

zo’n karakter = such a character / a character like that
It is almost always written as zo’n, not zo een, in modern usage.

Some nuances:

zo’n karakter – neutral “such a character / that kind of personality”.
zo’n raar karakter – “such a strange character”.

You wouldn’t usually write zo een karakter unless you are emphasizing each word separately for stylistic reasons; everyday Dutch uses zo’n.

What is the function of zelf here?

Zelf adds emphasis and corresponds to “himself/herself/themselves” or “personally” in English.

In deze schrijver zelf, it means:

“this writer themself” — not just the characters in the book, but the author personally.

So the nuance is:

Is it only the fictional characters that have this kind of personality,
or does the writer themself also have such a personality?

Without zelf, the sentence is more neutral:

Ik vraag me af of deze schrijver ook zo’n karakter heeft.
= I wonder if this writer also has such a character (less emphasis on “the writer personally”).

What does ook do here, and why is it before zo’n karakter?

Ook means “also / too”.

In zelf ook zo’n karakter, ook indicates that the writer is being added to some group of people (for example, the characters) who have that kind of character.

Word order:

…zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft is very natural.
You could also say …ook zelf zo’n karakter heeft, but zelf ook is more common and sounds smoother here.

Both variants are grammatically correct; changing the position of ook slightly shifts the emphasis, but the meaning is essentially the same in this context.

Why is it deze schrijver and not dit schrijver?

Dutch has two demonstratives for “this”:

de-words → deze (this)
het-words → dit (this)

Schrijver is a de-word:

de schrijver → deze schrijver = this writer
het boek → dit boek = this book

So:

deze schrijver is correct.
dit schrijver is wrong, because schrijver is not a het-word.

What does karakter mean here? Is it like “character” in English (a person in a story)?

In Dutch, karakter can mean:

Personality / character traits of a real person.
- Hij heeft een moeilijk karakter. = He has a difficult personality.
A character in a book / film (less common; personage is more precise).

In this sentence, because it is about the writer and whether they also have such a character, karakter means “personality”, not “fictional character”.

So the idea is: does the writer have that kind of personality, like the one they describe?

Can I say Ik vraag of deze schrijver… instead of Ik vraag me af of…?

They are not the same.

Ik vraag me af of… = I wonder whether…
You are thinking to yourself; no one is necessarily being asked.
Ik vraag of… = I ask whether…
You are asking someone else. It feels incomplete without an indirect object:
- Ik vraag hem of deze schrijver… = I ask him whether this writer…

Using ik vraag of… without a person is possible in some contexts (e.g. reported speech), but in everyday language, to express “I wonder”, you should use ik vraag me af of….

Could I move the clause and say: Of deze schrijver zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft, vraag ik me af.?

Yes, that is grammatically correct.

Dutch allows you to put the subordinate clause at the front for emphasis:

Ik vraag me af of deze schrijver zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft. (neutral)
Of deze schrijver zelf ook zo’n karakter heeft, vraag ik me af. (more formal/literary, emphasizes the “whether…” part)

In speech, the first version is much more common. The second sounds like written style, or rhetorical emphasis.

Why is it me and not mij in ik vraag me af?

Dutch has stressed and unstressed pronouns:

Unstressed (clitic): me, je, ze, ’k
Stressed (full): mij, jou, haar, ik

In fixed expressions and normal flow, the unstressed form is used:

Ik vraag me af.
Ik herinner me dat…
Ik vergis me.

You can say ik vraag mij af, but it sounds more formal, emphatic, or old-fashioned. Everyday Dutch strongly prefers ik vraag me af.