Talk:dwarsbomen

Is dwarsliggen really a synonym?

I have the feeling that to qualify as being a dwarsligger a person has to be someone whose co-operation or consent is sought to pursue some goal, whereas anybody who has the power (legal or non-legal) to stop someone from achieving a goal can dwarsbomen it. So when my neighbour is working very hard to keep their garden tidy, I can dwarsbomen this by sneakily dumping the leaves that fell in my garden in their garden. This malicious act is not dwarsliggen. If the neighbourhood committee wants to have a children's playground in the local park, I can gaan dwarsliggen by demanding that there be a dog run, knowing full well that there is no space and money for both. Such a contrary act is not by itself dwarsbomen, although that may be the eventual result. Can native speakers confirm this?  --Lambiam 22:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. Dwarsliggen means you're hindering/obstructing something, while dwarsbomen in absence of additional qualifications refers to actual thwarting. There's also a difference in transitivity (and less importantly separability): De oppositie lag dwars bij de stemming over het wetsvoorstel. (engaged in general obstructionism, could have been successful or not) vs. De oppositie dwarsboomde de stemming over het wetsvoorstel. (defeated the attempt to pass the law) ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I’ve changed the heading “Synonyms” to “See also”. I see that dwarsliggen is labelled “(transitive, intransitive)”. Is that a mistake?  --Lambiam 12:00, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lambiam No, that is not a mistake. I didn't think of it at the time, but dwarsliggen can be used transitively if the objects are persons (iemand dwarsliggen) or organisations. Using it transitively for activities sounds ungrammatical to me. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)