Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.

We can only practice in a limited way today.

Breakdown of Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.

• wij: we
• vandaag: today
• oefenen: to practice
• kunnen: can
• slechts: only
• beperkt: limited

Questions & Answers about Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.

What exactly does slechts mean here, and how is it different from alleen or maar?

In this sentence, slechts means only / merely / just in the sense of “to a small extent / not very much”.

• Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.
  → We can today only practice in a limited way.

Nuances compared:

• slechts
  
  • Slightly formal or written style.
  • Emphasises the smallness or insufficiency: merely, nothing more than.
• alleen
  
  • Very common, neutral colloquial “only”.
  • Wij kunnen vandaag alleen beperkt oefenen.
    = almost the same meaning; feels more everyday than slechts.
• maar (as “only”)
  
  • Colloquial, often used with numbers or quantities.
  • Wij kunnen vandaag maar beperkt oefenen.
    = also very natural; sounds more casual, spoken language.

In this sentence, you can safely use slechts, alleen, or maar. The meaning is essentially the same; only the level of formality/feel changes a bit.

What kind of word is beperkt here, and why doesn’t it get an extra ending like beperkte?

Beperkt is originally a past participle of beperken (to limit), but in this sentence it functions like an adverb or predicative adjective, describing how you can practice: in a limited way.

Key points:

• When adjectives are used before a noun, they usually take -e:
  
  • een beperkte tijd – a limited time
• When they are used adverbially (modifying a verb) or after zijn/worden as a predicative adjective, they usually do not take -e:
  
  • We oefenen beperkt. – We practice in a limited way.
  • De tijd is beperkt. – The time is limited.

In Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen, beperkt describes the degree of oefenen, so it’s adverbial/predicative in function and therefore appears as plain beperkt, not beperkte.

Why is kunnen in the second position and oefenen at the end of the sentence?

This follows the basic Dutch word order rule called V2 (“verb-second”):

1. The finite (conjugated) verb is in second position in main clauses.
2. Other verbs (infinitives, participles, modals’ main verbs) go to the end of the clause.

In this sentence:

• Wij = first element (subject)
• kunnen = finite verb in 2nd position
• vandaag slechts beperkt = “middle field” (adverbials)
• oefenen = infinitive verb at the end

So the structure is:

Subject – finite verb – [time / other info] – infinitive

You cannot bring oefenen forward without breaking standard word order.
For example, Wij kunnen oefenen vandaag slechts beperkt is incorrect.

Can vandaag go in a different place in the sentence?

Yes. Vandaag is a time adverb, and Dutch allows some flexibility with time expressions.

Some natural options:

• Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.
• Vandaag kunnen wij slechts beperkt oefenen. (focus on “today”)
• Wij kunnen slechts vandaag beperkt oefenen. (means: only today we can practice, which changes the meaning)

Typical neutral order after the verb is time – manner – place.
Here, vandaag (time) + slechts beperkt (manner) fits well:
Wij kunnen [vandaag] [slechts beperkt] oefenen.

Putting vandaag right at the front is also very common to emphasise the time:
Vandaag kunnen wij slechts beperkt oefenen.

Why is it wij kunnen and not wij kan?

Because kunnen has to agree with the subject.

Conjugation of kunnen (to be able to / can):

• ik kan – I can
• jij / je kan / kunt – you (singular) can
• hij / zij / het kan – he / she / it can
• wij / we kunnen – we can
• jullie kunnen – you (plural) can
• zij / ze kunnen – they can

Since the subject is wij (we), you must use kunnen:
Wij kunnen – we can
Wij kan is ungrammatical.

Can you leave out wij and just say something like Kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen?

No, you cannot leave the subject out like that in standard Dutch. Dutch is not a “null-subject” language like Spanish or Italian; you normally need to state the subject pronoun.

Correct options:

• Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.
• We kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen.
• Vandaag kunnen we slechts beperkt oefenen.

But Kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen is wrong because the subject (wij/we) is missing.

The closest natural “subject-drop” you might hear in very informal speech would still keep we after the verb, for example:

• Kunnen we vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen? – Can we only practice in a limited way today?

Why do we use oefenen here? Could I say something like praktiseren instead?

Oefenen is the normal Dutch verb for to practise a skill (music, sports, pronunciation, etc.):

• piano oefenen – to practise the piano
• Nederlands oefenen – to practise Dutch

In this sentence, oefenen is used without an object, because the context makes clear what you are practising.

Praktiseren exists but:

• It is rare and quite formal.
• It usually means something like to practise (a profession or belief) or to put into practice, not general skill practice.

Phrases like praktijk doen or praktijk maken are not natural translations for “to practise” in this general sense.

So for “We can only practise to a limited extent today”, oefenen is the correct and idiomatic choice.

Is there a difference between wij and we in Dutch?

Yes, but it’s mostly about stress and style, not grammar.

• wij

  • Stressed or emphatic form of “we”.
  • Used when you want to contrast or emphasise we:
    
    • Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen, niet zij.
      – We can only practise in a limited way today, not them.
  • Also sounds a bit more formal or careful.

• we

  • Unstressed, more neutral and very common in spoken Dutch.
  • In your sentence, We kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen is probably what most people would say in everyday conversation.

Both are grammatically correct; the sentence doesn’t change in structure or tense, only in nuance.

How would the sentence change if I used maar instead of slechts?

You get:

• Wij kunnen vandaag maar beperkt oefenen.

This is completely correct and very idiomatic. The meaning is practically the same as with slechts:

• slechts – a bit more formal, written, or slightly stronger in “merely / nothing more than”.
• maar – more colloquial and very common in speech for “only / just” in this kind of sentence.

So you can safely choose:

• Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen. (slightly more formal)
• Wij kunnen vandaag maar beperkt oefenen. (more informal, spoken style)

How do you pronounce the words in Wij kunnen vandaag slechts beperkt oefenen?

Here is a rough guide (IPA + an English-oriented description):

• Wij – /ʋɛi/

  • w = Dutch ʋ, between English v and w (lips rounded, less friction).
  • ij sounds roughly like English eye, but a bit shorter.

• kunnen – /ˈkʏnə(n)/

  • u = /ʏ/, like the vowel in British put, but slightly more fronted.
  • Final -en often sounds like a weak -ən or even just a schwa /ə/ in fast speech.

• vandaag – /vɑnˈdaːx/

  • a in van = /ɑ/, like British cup but with a more open mouth.
  • aa = long /aː/, like father but held longer.
  • Final g = /x/, a throaty sound at the back of the mouth (like the Scottish loch).

• slechts – /slɛxts/

  • ch = /x/, same guttural sound as the g in vandaag.
  • Final cluster -ts is pronounced fully: /ts/.

• beperkt – /bəˈpɛrkt/

  • e in be- = /bə/, a weak schwa.
  • rk pronounced clearly; t at the end is also fully pronounced.

• oefenen – /ˈuːfənə(n)/

  • oe = /uː/, like oo in food.
  • Again, -en often reduced to /ən/ or just /ə/.

Spoken fluently, you’ll often hear some linking and reduced endings, for example:

[ʋɛi ˈkʏnə vɑnˈdaːx slɛxts bəˈpɛrkt ˈuːfənə] (approx.)