1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Bonden säger att älgen tillh…

"Bonden säger att älgen tillhör honom."

Translation:The farmer says that the moose belongs to him.

October 11, 2015



Do moose actually "belong" to people? I thought they were wild. Maybe it is a dead moose...do Swedes actually "own" live moose?


Actually, they do. There are many so called "moose parks" around Sweden with tame moose in the enclosures.


Is "The farmer says that the moose is his" an acceptable translation=


Probably not, since that would be "Bonden säger att älgen är hans" in Swedish.


"The farmer says the moose belings to him" was not accepted. I think it should have been: the "that" is implied.


Exactly, you don't need the 'that' there. The phrase is grammatically correct without it.


When I first read it, I thought it was one of those humorous sentences translated as "The farmer tells the moose that it belongs to him". Obviously, it isn't, however now I'm curious; how would one say that in Swedish?


Now this would interest me too as I couldn't find any verb that would place the moose in the Dative position. How would one tell a moose that it were now inferior to its new master?


I see two options: Bonden säger till älgen att den tillhör honom. or Bonden säger till älgen att den är hans. I'm not sure that moose understands the first sentence with tlillhör, it's a difficult verb ;-)


I think that if the moose has been born and raised in Sweden, it will understand even this more difficult verb. ;-) Otherwise, I already thought about a sentence as you suggested first, but wasn't sure if there weren't also a closer counterpart to the English tell.

Anyway, thanks a lot, this was very helpful! :-)


Can "The farmer is saying that the moose belongs to him" work?


Yes. Unless there is specific reason not to, both present and present continuous should should be accepted everywhere in translation from Swedish to English. If it isn't, report it. It was missing here but it is added now.


My answer "The peasant says that the moose belongs to him" isn't accepted. I think it should be correct, right?


Maybe PEASANT should be also appropriate?


I don't think peasant is accepted here because there's nothing about the farmer that says s/he is poor. This could be a rich farmer, for all we know. Maybe "dräng" would be more accurate for peasant?


Why tillhör instead of tillhörer? The English sentence says belongs.


In such cases I would recommend you do the next: such words as this 'tillhör' are formed with the 'base-word' and a prefix. So this base-word changes always the same way it does when being alone.

HÖRA - hör - hörde - hört

tillHÖRA - tillhör - tillhödre - tillhört

Moreover such principle can help with identifying en/ett words: ETT svar - ETT ansvar - ETT försvar etc.


The princple of such verbs is not unfamiliar to me (horen and toebehoren in Dutch). I think I had a glitch of the mind and didn't recognise tillhör as the conjugated form.


Why is it not possible to translate "bonde" with "peasant"? I wrote that and it was not accepted (reported).


In the US, we would never call a farmer a "peasant", it would be considered very rude nowadays. A peasant is an historical term meaning a very poor person just able to grow enough food for survival.


And such poor persons = peasants do not exist in the USA today?


unfortunately, we have plenty of really poor people here in the US and many grow food to help feed themselves, but I would never want to insult them and add to their pain by calling them peasants. It is considered a very derogatory term in modern day usage.


I'd say theyre distinctly different words, though there is some narrow overlap where you use either. That said, google translate gives 'peasant' as the first translation of 'bonde', which suggests the overlap might be bigger in Swedish.


Google Translate is not a reliable source for such conclusions: when I use it to translate "en bonde" it gives "a farmer".


Yes, but babla gives the translations (copy):

  • bonde {utr.}EN - farmer peasant agriculturist pawn

and Interglot gives for peasant:

  • one of a (chiefly European) class of agricultural laborers


and I think, we are here in a Swedish course and Sweden is an European country.


Yes, nobility, citizens, peasants were the classes in the Middle Ages. These are really over after the French revolution. And English is also a European language, even American English has its roots in Europe.
Since neither of us are native English speakers, it seems unwise to make any hard statements about the word "peasant". I do know that "farmer" is neutral and that seems to me to be the best translation for bonde.


What is "att" doing in there? Thanks.


It's there for the same reason English has 'that'; it's used as a conjunction to connect 'bonden säger' to 'älgen tillhör honom'.


I give the correct answer but you say time after time it is wrong


You should report it. From what I gather, there's not much the course developers can do about technical glitches like that.

Learn Swedish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.