Log inSign up

Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.
Anna helps me not to give up by reminding me of my earlier successful experiences.

Breakdown of Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

Anna
Anna
niet
not
om
for
mijn
my
mij
me
helpen
to help
door
by
eerder
earlier
opgeven
to give up
herinneren aan
to remind of
de succeservaring
the successful experience
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Dutch grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Dutch now

Questions & Answers about Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

Why do we say “helpt mij om niet op te geven” instead of just “helpt mij niet op te geven”? What is the function of “om” here, and can it be left out?

“om … te” introduces a purpose/infinitive clause, similar to English “to (do something)” in the sense of purpose.

  • With “om”:
    • Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven.
      = Anna helps me (in order) not to give up.

Here, “om” clearly introduces the goal/purpose of the helping.

Can you leave “om” out?

  • Grammatically, yes, it is often left out in everyday speech:
    • Anna helpt mij niet op te geven.

But without “om”, the sentence becomes more ambiguous:

  • It can be read as: Anna helps me not to give up (intended meaning).
  • But it can also be read as: Anna does not help me to give up (i.e. she refuses to help me give up).

So in a sentence like this, using “om”:

  • makes the structure clearer,
  • strongly signals purpose, not negation of “helpt”.

That’s why “helpt mij om niet op te geven” is stylistically safer and clearer, especially in writing.

What’s happening with “op te geven”? Why is “op” separated from “geven”, and why is the “te” in the middle?

“opgeven” is a separable verb in Dutch.

  • Base verb: opgeven = to give up, to hand in, to register, etc.
  • In the infinitive with “te”, separable verbs are split:
    • pattern: op te geven
    • not: te opgeven

General rule for separable verbs:

  • Infinitive without “te”: opgeven
    • Ik wil niet opgeven. – I don’t want to give up.
  • Infinitive with “te”: op te geven
    • Ik probeer niet op te geven. – I try not to give up.

The particle “op” stays with the verb, but “te” comes between the particle and the stem.

So “niet op te geven” is just the “te”-infinitive of opgeven with negation.

Why is it “door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren” and not “door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen herinneren” without “te”?

Here, “door” + te-infinitive expresses the way or means by which something happens, like English “by doing X”.

Structure:

  • door
    • [object(s)] + te
      • [infinitive]

So:

  • door (by)
  • mij (object)
  • aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen (prepositional object)
  • te herinneren (infinitive)

→ door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren
= by reminding me of my earlier successful experiences

In this structure, “te” is required:

  • Correct: door mij aan X te herinneren
  • Incorrect: door mij aan X herinneren

You only use the bare infinitive (without te) after certain verbs like kunnen, willen, moeten, gaan, laten, zien, horen etc., not after “door”. “Door” always uses the te-infinitive in this construction.

Why is it “iemand aan iets herinneren” here, instead of “zich iets herinneren”? What’s the difference?

Dutch has two different patterns:

  1. iemand aan iets herinneren – to remind someone of something

    • Anna herinnert mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen.
      = Anna reminds me of my earlier successful experiences.
    • Pattern: [subject] herinnert [indirect object] aan [thing]

  2. zich iets herinneren – to remember something (oneself)

    • Ik herinner mij mijn eerdere succeservaringen.
      = I remember my earlier successful experiences.
    • Pattern: [subject] herinnert zich [thing]

In your sentence:

  • Anna is reminding someone else (you), so we need pattern 1:
    • door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren
      = by reminding me of my earlier successful experiences

If Anna herself were remembering, you’d say:

  • door zich haar eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren
    = by remembering her earlier successful experiences (herself)

So:

  • remind someone of something → iemand aan iets herinneren
  • remember something yourself → zich iets herinneren
Why does the preposition “aan” come before “mijn eerdere succeservaringen” instead of at the end, like in English “remind me of”? Could it be at the very end?

In Dutch, the normal pattern is:

  • herinneren aan + [thing]

So:

  • mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen herinneren

In the te-infinitive construction:

  • door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren

You cannot move “aan” to the very end the way English sometimes strands prepositions:

  • Correct: mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen herinneren
  • Incorrect: mij mijn eerdere succeservaringen herinneren aan

Dutch does allow prepositions at the end in some clause types, but with this verb + “aan” pattern, the preposition naturally stays right in front of the noun phrase (aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen).

Why is it “mij” here and not “me”? What’s the difference between “mij” and “me”?

Both “mij” and “me” mean “me” as an object pronoun.

  • mij – stressed form (used when you want to emphasize me specifically, or in more formal/written style)
  • me – unstressed form (more neutral, very common in speech, usually not emphasized)

In your sentence:

  • Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

Both pronouns could be “me” without changing the basic meaning:

  • Anna helpt me om niet op te geven door me aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

Why might “mij” be used here?

  • Written style often chooses “mij”.
  • It can also sound slightly more emphatic, like helps *me (personally)*.

So:

  • In everyday speech: me is more common.
  • In careful writing or when emphasizing: mij is common.
Do I really need to repeat “mij”? Could I say “Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren”?

In this sentence, you do need the object of “herinneren”, i.e. who is being reminded.

  • Anna helpt mij … – “mij” is the object of “helpt”.
  • door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren – “mij” is the object of “herinneren”.

If you omit the second “mij”:

  • Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.

This sounds incomplete or wrong to a native speaker, because:

  • herinneren aan requires someone to be reminded: iemand aan iets herinneren.

You could avoid repetition by changing the sentence more:

  • Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door me aan eerdere successen te herinneren. (still uses “me” twice, but lighter)
  • or paraphrasing:
    Anna helpt mij om niet op te geven door me eraan te herinneren dat ik eerder succes heb gehad.

But within the given structure, the second “mij” is grammatically necessary.

Why is it “eerdere succeservaringen” with “eerdere” ending in -e? When do adjectives get this -e ending in Dutch?

“eerder” is the adjective meaning “earlier / previous”. In front of a noun, Dutch adjectives often take an -e ending.

Basic rule (simplified):

  • Adjective
    • -e
    :
    • before all plural nouns
    • before all “de”-words (common gender) in definite noun phrases
  • Adjective without -e:
    • before indefinite, singular “het”-words

Here:

  • succeservaringen is plural (experiences).
  • So the adjective must take -e:
    • eerdere succeservaringen (earlier successful experiences)

Examples:

  • de eerdere poging – the earlier attempt
  • het eerdere probleem – the earlier problem
  • een eerder probleem – an earlier problem (het-word, indefinite → no -e)
  • eerdere problemen – earlier problems (plural → -e)

So “eerdere succeservaringen” follows the general rule for plural noun phrases.

What exactly is “succeservaringen”? Is this just “successes”? How is this compound formed, and is it common?

“succeservaringen” is a compound noun:

  • succes (success)
  • ervaringen (experiences; plural of ervaring)

Combined:

  • succeservaringen = experiences of success, successful experiences

Nuance:

  • succeservaringen emphasizes concrete moments/experiences where you were successful.
  • Plain successen is more generic: successes, achievements, not necessarily felt as experiences.

Formation:

  • Dutch loves compounds:
    • succes
      • ervaring → succeservaring (singular)
    • plural: succeservaringen

It’s a perfectly natural and understandable word; not extremely everyday, but absolutely normal in contexts like coaching, psychology, self-help, education, etc.

Why is the negation “niet” placed before “op te geven” and not somewhere else, like “om op niet te geven”?

In Dutch, “niet” usually comes before the infinitive verb group that it negates.

Here, the infinitive group is:

  • op te geven (to give up)

So:

  • om niet op te geven
    = (in order) not to give up

Placing “niet”:

  • Correct: om niet op te geven
    • “niet” negates the whole action of “opgeven”.
  • Incorrect: om op niet te geven – this is ungrammatical.

General pattern:

  • om niet te roken – in order not to smoke
  • om niet te huilen – in order not to cry
  • om niet op te geven – in order not to give up

So the position “niet op te geven” is just the normal word order: negation + separable verb in te-infinitive form.

What does “door” express here? Is it “through” or “by”? How does “door + te-infinitive” work?

In this sentence, “door” means “by” (indicating means or method), not “through” in a spatial sense.

  • door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren
    = by reminding me of my earlier successful experiences

Structure:

  • door
    • [object(s)] + te
      • [infinitive]

This construction answers the question:

  • Hoe helpt Anna mij om niet op te geven? – How does Anna help me not to give up?
    → door mij aan mijn eerdere succeservaringen te herinneren.
    – by reminding me of my earlier successful experiences.

It’s very similar to the English “by doing X” pattern.