Learn Hardcore Dutch: In de middagpauze lopen wij even naar buiten om frisse lucht te halen. - In the lunch break we go outside for a bit to get some fresh air.

If you start the sentence with “In de middagpauze” (a time phrase), that whole phrase counts as position 1. The verb must then come next (position 2), and the subject follows it:

In de middagpauze (1) lopen (2) wij (3) even naar buiten …

If you started with the subject instead, you’d say:

Wij lopen in de middagpauze even naar buiten …

Both are correct; the difference is just which element you put first for emphasis or flow. The verb still stays in second position.

Why is “wij” used instead of “we”?

Dutch has two forms for “we”:

wij – stressed, more emphatic
we – unstressed, more neutral/common in speech

Using “wij” can:

Emphasize the subject (we, as opposed to someone else)
Sound a bit more formal or careful

You could also say:

In de middagpauze lopen we even naar buiten …

That’s completely normal in everyday spoken Dutch.

Why is the verb “lopen” used here, and not “gaan”?

Lopen literally means “to walk”, but it’s also often used more loosely for “go (on foot)” in everyday Dutch.

Nuance:

Wij lopen naar buiten – we (physically) walk outside.
Wij gaan naar buiten – we go outside (could be walking, but the manner isn’t highlighted).

In many contexts, both are possible; “lopen” just makes it clear the movement is on foot or feels a bit more “physical” than gaan.

What does the little word “even” do in this sentence?

Even is a very common little word that softens the action and often suggests “just for a bit” / “briefly” / “quickly”.

Here it roughly adds the idea:

We’ll just quickly / briefly go outside…

It makes the sentence sound:

More casual and friendly
Less heavy or formal

Without it:

In de middagpauze lopen wij naar buiten om frisse lucht te halen.
→ perfectly correct, but a bit more neutral or “bare”.

With even, it sounds natural and conversational.

Why do we say “naar buiten” and not just “buiten”?

There’s a movement/direction difference:

buiten – “outside” as a location
- Ik ben buiten. = I am outside.
naar buiten – “to the outside / outside” as a direction
- Ik ga naar buiten. = I’m going (to) outside.

In your sentence there is movement (they are going from inside to outside), so you need “naar buiten”, not just “buiten”.

What is the function of “om … te halen”?

Om … te + infinitive is a very common way to express purpose (“in order to …”).

Structure:

om
- [infinitive clause] with te before the verb:
  - om frisse lucht te halen = (in order) to get some fresh air

So the sentence structure is:

We walk outside in order to get some fresh air.

In many informal contexts, “om” can be dropped:

… naar buiten frisse lucht te halen
→ possible but less common here; “om … te” is clearer and more standard in purpose clauses.

Why is “halen” used with “frisse lucht”?

Halen literally means “to get / fetch / pick up”.

The expression “frisse lucht halen” is a fixed, natural-sounding collocation meaning:

to get some fresh air / to go out for some fresh air

It doesn’t mean you’re “fetching” air in a literal way; it’s just the standard way to say this in Dutch, similar to English “get some fresh air” rather than “breathe fresh air” (frisse lucht ademen would be more literal and less idiomatic here).

Why is there no article before “frisse lucht”?

In this context, “lucht” (air) is treated as a mass noun, like “water” or “bread” in English.

Dutch often omits the article with mass nouns when you mean them in a general, non-specific way:

water drinken – to drink water
brood eten – to eat bread
frisse lucht halen – to get (some) fresh air

Adding an article (de frisse lucht) would make it sound like you mean some specific, identifiable air, which is not intended here.

Why is it “In de middagpauze” and not “Tijdens de middagpauze”?

Both are possible, but there’s a nuance:

In de middagpauze – literally “in the lunch break”, very common, neutral.
Tijdens de middagpauze – “during the lunch break”, a bit more explicit/formal about the timeframe.

In is often used in Dutch for “during” with time periods:

In de vakantie – during the holidays
In het weekend – at/on the weekend

So “In de middagpauze” is natural and idiomatic.
“Tijdens de middagpauze” would also be correct, just slightly more formal or explicit.

Why is the tense simple present (lopen) even though in English we’d say “are going / walk”?

Dutch uses the simple present much more broadly than English. Where English often prefers the present continuous (am/is/are + -ing), Dutch usually just uses a simple present form:

Wij lopen naar buiten.
→ “We are going/walking outside.”

You can form a continuous in Dutch (e.g. wij zijn aan het lopen), but it’s used less often and usually highlights the activity as ongoing. For regular, habitual, or scheduled actions, the plain present (lopen) is standard.

Could the word order be “Wij lopen in de middagpauze even naar buiten om frisse lucht te halen” instead?

Yes, that’s perfectly correct. Both versions are possible:

In de middagpauze lopen wij even naar buiten om frisse lucht te halen.
→ Emphasis slightly on when (in the lunch break).
Wij lopen in de middagpauze even naar buiten om frisse lucht te halen.
→ Emphasis slightly on who (we).

In both cases the finite verb (lopen) is second:

In de middagpauze (1) lopen (2) wij …
Wij (1) lopen (2) in de middagpauze …

It’s mainly a matter of style and emphasis.