De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

The professor says that making mistakes is normal, which reassures me.

Breakdown of De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

• zijn: to be
• dat: that
• mij: me
• maken: to make
• zeggen: to say
• de fout: the mistake
• de professor: the professor
• wat: which
• normaal: normal
• geruststellen: to reassure

Questions & Answers about De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

Why does the verb is stand at the end of dat fouten maken normaal is?

In Dutch, main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb is in the second position.

• Main clause example: De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is.
  – zegt is the main verb and stands in second position.

But dat fouten maken normaal is is a subordinate clause introduced by dat. In most subordinate clauses, the finite verb moves to the end of the clause.

• Subordinate clause: dat fouten maken normaal is
  – Subject: fouten maken
  – Predicate adjective: normaal
  – Finite verb: is at the end.

So the word order is: > dat + [subject] + [rest] + [finite verb at the end]
> dat fouten maken normaal is

What exactly is fouten maken here? Why not just a normal subject like het?

Fouten maken is an infinitive construction (literally: to make mistakes) that functions as a noun-like subject, similar to an English gerund.

Compare:

• Dutch: Fouten maken is normaal.
• English: Making mistakes is normal.

So grammatically:

• fouten = plural noun (mistakes)
• maken = infinitive (to make)
• Together they behave like a single unit acting as the subject of is.

You could also turn it into a pronoun:

• Het is normaal fouten te maken.
  (It is normal to make mistakes.)

But in the original sentence, fouten maken itself is the subject.

Could you also say dat het normaal is fouten te maken instead of dat fouten maken normaal is?

Yes, you can. Both are grammatically correct, but the feel is slightly different.

1. dat fouten maken normaal is

   • Very direct: fouten maken is the subject.
   • Feels simple, clear, and colloquial.

2. dat het normaal is fouten te maken

   • het is an empty/anticipatory subject (like English it).
   • fouten te maken is the real content (extraposed to the end).
   • Slightly more formal or written in tone, but still common.

Meaning-wise, they are practically the same: that making mistakes is normal / that it is normal to make mistakes.

Why is it fouten maken (plural) and not fout maken (singular)?

Both are possible, but they are used differently:

• fouten maken = to make mistakes (in general)
  – Talking about the general idea of making errors.

• een fout maken = to make a (single) mistake
  – Talking about one specific mistake.

In this sentence the idea is general:

• dat fouten maken normaal is
  → that making mistakes (in general) is normal.

If you said:

• dat een fout maken normaal is

it would sound more like that making a single mistake is normal, which is less idiomatic in this generic context.

What does wat refer to in wat mij geruststelt, and why is it wat and not dat or die?

Here wat is a relative pronoun referring not to a single noun, but to the entire preceding clause:

• Earlier clause: De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is
• wat mij geruststelt = which reassures me
• So wat roughly means: which (thing / fact / situation).

In Dutch:

• Use die/dat when the relative pronoun refers to a specific noun:

  • De opmerking die hij maakte… (the remark that he made…)
  • Het boek dat ik lees… (the book that I am reading…)

• Use wat when it refers to:

  • an entire clause:
    Hij is op tijd gekomen, wat me verbaasde.
    (He arrived on time, which surprised me.)
  • iets, niets, alles, veel, etc.:
    Alles wat hij zegt… (Everything that he says…)

Here wat refers to the whole idea that the professor says that making mistakes is normal.

Could I replace wat mij geruststelt with dat stelt mij gerust?

Yes, that is a natural alternative, with a very similar meaning:

• De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.
• De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, en dat stelt mij gerust.

Nuances:

• wat mij geruststelt
  – More compact, slightly more formal/connected.
  – Emphasizes the clause as a single fact that reassures you.

• en dat stelt mij gerust
  – Uses dat as a pronoun for that (fact).
  – A bit more explicit and conversational.

Both are perfectly fine.

Why is it mij and not me in wat mij geruststelt? Is there a difference?

Dutch has two forms for the first-person singular object pronoun:

• me = unstressed form
• mij = stressed form

In many contexts, both are possible, but they carry different emphasis:

• wat mij geruststelt
  – Emphasis on me: which reassures *me (as opposed to someone else)*.
  – Slightly more formal or careful.

• wat me geruststelt
  – More neutral and colloquial.
  – Often what you hear in everyday speech.

In this sentence, wat mij geruststelt sounds a bit more careful or written. wat me geruststelt would also be completely correct and natural.

What kind of verb is geruststellen, and how does it work in wat mij geruststelt?

Geruststellen is a separable verb:

• Base form: geruststellen (to reassure, literally to put at ease).
• In a main clause, it usually splits:
  • Hij stelt mij gerust. (He reassures me.)

Parts:

• gerust = at ease, reassured
• stellen = to put / to place

In wat mij geruststelt:

• We have a relative clause: wat mij geruststelt.
• In subordinate and relative clauses, separable verbs join together at the end:
  • … wat mij geruststelt. (not: stelt gerust)

So:

• Main clause: Dat stelt mij gerust.
• Subordinate/relative clause: … wat mij geruststelt.

Why is there a comma before wat mij geruststelt?

The comma separates:

1. The main clause:
   De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is
2. The relative clause referring to the entire main clause:
   wat mij geruststelt

This type of sentence-final relative clause (with wat referring to the whole previous clause) is usually preceded by a comma in Dutch, similar to English:

• …, which reassures me.

If you left out the comma, it would be harder to read and would look incorrect in standard written Dutch.

Can wat mij geruststelt come earlier in the sentence?

Not very naturally, no. Because wat here refers to the entire preceding clause, that clause has to come first.

Natural:

• De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

Strange/incorrect:

• Wat mij geruststelt, is dat de professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is.
  – Here wat would normally need a clear antecedent; as written, this is odd.

If you want to front the “reassuring” part, Dutch would more naturally use a different construction:

• Wat mij geruststelt, is dat fouten maken normaal is.
  – Now wat is understood as that which, a bit more abstract and formal, and is links it to the clause dat fouten maken normaal is.
  – This is grammatical but more formal and stylistically different.

How does Dutch indirect speech here compare to English? Why not change the tense after zegt?

The Dutch sentence:

• De professor zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

compares to English:

• The professor says that making mistakes is normal, which reassures me.

Both use the present tense in:

• zegt / says
• is / is

In English, we often use “backshift” in reported speech with said:

• The professor *said that making mistakes was normal.*

In Dutch, if the main verb is past (zei), native speakers often keep the present in the subordinate clause when the statement is still true:

• De professor zei dat fouten maken normaal is.
  (The professor said that making mistakes is normal.)

You can also use past:

• … dat fouten maken normaal was.

but Dutch is less strict about this than English. The present is is common when the idea is still valid now.

Is De professor the only correct article here? Could it be De hoogleraar or something else?

Grammatically, other nouns are possible; it depends on nuance:

• De professor
  – Common in everyday language for a university professor.
  – Slightly informal/colloquial but widely used.

• De hoogleraar
  – More formal, institutional term (used in job titles, official contexts).

• Mijn docent / mijn leraar
  – my teacher (possibly non-university).

All of these work grammatically:

• De hoogleraar zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.
• Mijn docent zegt dat fouten maken normaal is, wat mij geruststelt.

The structure of the rest of the sentence stays the same.

How do you pronounce zegt, especially the g and t at the end?

Pronunciation tips (in IPA):

• zegt → /zɛxt/

Details:

• ze- → /zɛ/ like ze in zetten (to put), similar to ze in English zebra but with a short e.
• -g- → /x/ a voiceless velar fricative, like the ch in German Bach or Scottish loch.
• Final t is clearly pronounced: /t/.

So:

• zeg (imperative or stem) → /zɛx/
• zegt (3rd person singular) → /zɛxt/

Dutch remains careful with final consonants; the t should not be dropped in careful speech.