Posts under Grammar

The Genitive

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Sep
24
2009

I think I wrote about it before, but probably last year. And since the question keeps coming back, it might be worth to revisit the genitive.

You see, as far as nouns go, and compared to other European languages (Finnish immediately comes to mind here), Swedish is very simple indeed. It has only one case ending, and that’s the genitive (or genitiv, as it’s called in Swedish). You all know what that thingie is, right? The genitive is a form of noun that denotes a person, or a thing, for that matter, that possesses something. In a very broad meaning and context.

In English it’s expressed by the ‘s ending, which, by the way, is often abused and misused. So if you normally struggle with the apostrophe in English, it might be very good news to you that there’s no apostrophe in the Swedish genitive.

So what is there? Not much really. You just stick “s” at the end of the word you want to use in the genitive case. Like this:

  • Pers dotter är 12 år. – Per’s daughter is 12 years old.

Simple, isn’t it? It works like that not only with people, but with other nouns, as well.

Like this:

  • Sveriges huvudstad heter Stockholm. – The capital of Sweden is Stockholm.

As you can see in the above example, sometimes the genitive case in English is expressed by using “noun+of”. In Swedish you just stick that “s” where needed.

Like this:

  • Gatornas namn står på kartan. – The street names are on the map.

In this example, the noun “gator” (streets) already has an ending – “-na” (definite plural). But you still stick that “s” and your work there is done. And also, as you can see, sometimes in English you just use two nouns next to each other to express the idea of the genitive. In Swedish, all you need is that one, small “s”.

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , 		6 Comments | Post a Comment

Position and Direction continued

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Sep
12
2009

A couple of posts back we were talking about those little words that denote such important things as position and direction. Boring stuff, yes I know, but very useful nonetheless.

So today let’s continue in the same vein and discuss här and där. And hit and dit.
You see, in English, it’s all the same, whether you’re talking about “here” as in “come here!” and “here” as in “I’m here.”

Unfortunately, it’s not as simple and straightforward in Swedish. Here (no pun intended) you have two different words that mean just that – “here”. And that’s how Swedish distinguishes between position and direction in much more clearer fashion than English does.

Of course, it’s not just “here” that falls into this category, but “there” as well. And before I totally confuse you, and you give up reading the rest of this post, why don’t we just take a look at these words and see what they’re all about.

So, here (again, no pun intended) we go:

position  -  direction

  • Where?  -  Where… to?  -  Where… from?
  • här (here)  – hit (here)  - härifrån (from there)
  • där (there)  -  dit (there)  -  därifrån (from there)

Don’t worry, they’re not as evil as they look. And once you get used to them, you will realize they’re actually very handy little words. I promise!

  • Jag trodde att du skulle komma hit. – I thought you were coming here.
  • Men jag är kvar här i Gävle. – But I’m still here in Gävle.
  • Jag åker härifrån om en timme. – I’m leaving (from) here in an hour.

So in other words, if you are somewhere and you’re not on the way there or from there, then you use “här” and “där.” If, however, you are coming or going, or talking about changing your position, then you should use “hit”/”härifrån” or “dit”/”därifrån” depending on whether you’re coming or going.

And as somebody very aptly noticed in the comments section, it’s not just the particles that differ depending on whether they talk about position and direction, but the question words as well.

And it goes like this:

  • Expressions of position (befintlighet) answer to the question “var?” (where?).
  • Expressions of direction (riktning) answer to the questions “vart?” (where…to?) and “varifrån?” (where…from?).

I know it takes a little bit of getting used to, but in the end, it’s not all that complicated. Unless of course, you are like me, and half the time you don’t know whether you’re coming or going, or what not.  And I mean it in a strictly innocent way.

:)

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , , , 		1 Comment | Post a Comment

Particles of Position and Direction

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Sep
5
2009

Uhuh, I knew this day would come. I knew that sooner or later someone would email me asking about the difference between “hemma” and “hem” and “hemifrån”. “Ute” and “ut”, and “inne” and “in”. Yeah, you get the picture…

It’s not very exciting stuff (hey, I’d much rather write about the lovely city of Lund), I know, I know, but essential nonetheless.

So what’s the deal with those particles?
Well, just like in English, in Swedish there’s a whole bunch of little words that are used to denote position (“where?”) and direction (“where to?” and “where from?”).

The two bits that often get confused by people learning Swedish are the ones that describe “where?” and “where to?” Why? They translate into English more or less as the same words.

So let’s take a closer look at them.

Position    –       Direction:
Where? –        Where to?        –         Where from?

  • hemma (at home) – hem (home) – hemifrån (from home)
  • borta (away) – bort (away) – bortifrån (from a long way away)
  • inne (inside, indoors) – in (in, inside, indoors) – inifrån (from inside)
  • ute (outside, outdoors) – ut (out, outside, outdoors) – utifrån (from outside)
  • uppe (up [there]) – upp (up) – uppifrån (from above)
  • nere (down [there]) – ner, ned (down) – nerifrån (from below)
  • frame (in front [here]) – fram (forward, on) – framifrån (from the front)

Sven är hemma nu. – Sven is at home now.
Åsa måste gå hemifrån kl. 8 varje morgon. – Åsa has to leave home at 8 every morning.
Jag kommer hem kl. 7. – I get home at 7.

But wait, that’s not all.
Let’s say you are talking about places on a map. Then, just like you would in English, you use uppe (up) and nere (down) to describe places north and south of where you are (unless of course, you’re talking about Maine, which is always “down east” no matter where you are).

De bor nere i Lund. - They live down in Lund.
Sommaren tillbringar de uppe i Kiruna. – They spend the summer up in Kiruna.

PS. And I have no clue where my recent obsession with Lund came from. :)

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , , , 		4 Comments | Post a Comment

Anybody’s “man” - another personal pronoun

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Sep
2
2009

Since we were talking about personal pronouns the other day, and as I see, it has provoked some very interesting comments, I thought it would be a good idea to continue on the subject.

“What? There are even more pronouns in Swedish?” I hear you say.

Well, not that many more. Actually, just one more that I think I should mention on here. And depending on how you look at it, it may not even be a pronoun at all. Yes, I’m talking about “man”. Not just any man, but the one that is normally translated into English as “one”. Well, it’s translated as “one” if we want to go all formal, but normally, it becomes something like “you” or “they” or “we”, or simply “people” in English. In other words, this “man” thingie is used when we want to talk about people in general and nobody in particular.

And it looks like that:

  • Man blir trött om man sover för mycket. – One gets tired if one sleeps too much. Or more like a normal person would say it: You get tired if you sleep too much. (Though personally, I disagree with this statement. What nonsense! I love to sleep!)

Here’s another example:

  • I Sverige dricker man mycket kaffe. – They (people) drink a lot of coffee in Sweden. (Yeah, that’s for sure!)

And another:

  • Man ser sjön från balkongen. – You (we) can see the lake from the balcony.

So that’s the easy part. The not so easy part could be the objective form of “man”, which is “en”. Like this:

  • Ingen gillar en, om man skryter. – No one likes you if you boast.

But, if the object refers back to the subject, then the reflexive “sig” bit is used. Like this:

  • Man frågar sig, varför det hände. – One asks oneself why it happened. Or more like a normal person would say it: You ask yourself why it happened.

I always try to abide by the K.I.S.S. principle when discussing grammar, because that’s what most people learning a foreign language need. But if you feel the need to elaborate on this very “personal” subject, the comments are all yours. Go wild! :)

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , , 		3 Comments | Post a Comment

Dem Pesky Personal Pronouns

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Aug
26
2009

The other day I got an email asking me to clarify which form of the third person plural personal pronoun (that would be the Swedish equivalent of “they” in English) was correct. The question, of course, was about “de” and “dom”.

Hmmm… it’s an interesting question. Both of those words are pronounced the same – as ”dom” and mean exactly the same. In fact, the explanation that you can see in many grammar books for foreigners is that we write “de” and pronounce it “dom”.

Hmmm… then what about those not so infrequent times when you can see “dom” actually written as “dom”? Though personally it rubs me the wrong way, you can find plenty of “dom” in less formal written Swedish. And that’s one thing I really don’t understand. After all it’s so much faster and more efficient to write “de” instead of “dom”. And I don’t know if it’s just me, but “de” just LOOKS more sophisticated, too.

So yes, we say “dom” and write it mostly as “de”, except for the times when we write it as “dom”. Easy!

But then there’s “dem” which also sounds like “dom”.

“Dem” is the object pronoun of “de”. “What’s that?”, I hear you ask. That’s when a personal pronoun acts as an object in a sentence. Like that:

  • Jag ser dem. – I can see them.

So basically, you have two different words: “de” and “dem”, which are both pronounced as “dom”. And sometimes written as “dom” as well.

See? That wasn’t confusing at all, now, was it? :)

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , 		12 Comments | Post a Comment