1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "For they do not know what th…

"For they do not know what they do."

Translation:For de vet ikke hva de gjør.

October 29, 2015

48 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/NilMarkas

Are you people seriously so offended by a half of a bible verse that doesn't even directly mention god or anything -remotely- religious? No one's preaching and you can rest assured that no one's going to convert anyone with a totally passive verse from the bible. And something tells me (based on a comment that one of you left on the Norwegian-English quote) that were this a verse from the Quran or -any- other religious text, you wouldn't be making such a big deal about it, quite the contrary, you'd be praising Duolingo for its progressivism =P Can you not see the hypocrisy in such statements? I'm irreligious myself and people like you don't seem to get the point of being so. You're not helping anything, just (ironically) trying to ram your views down everyone else's throats, making the rest of us look bad in the process.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ilmolleggi

Lol I think some people are just overly sensitive on both sides. As far as I'm concerned I hadn't even noticed the quote but I don't really care where it comes from as long as the exercise is useful and doesn't insult anybody.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/NilMarkas

Hør, hør! Hehe


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Moni671373

What came first in my mind when I read the sentence was the title of an old film with James Dean. In the German version the name of the film is identical with that sentence. Perhaps duo meant that.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Alanija

I thought the same and looked it up. The original title is "Rebel Without a Cause" and is translated to Norwegian as "Rotløs ungdom". So Duo obviously didn't meant that. But until this moment, I never even realised that it's a quote from the bible :D


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Greenee4

I came here for the James Dean reference as well (I am German too and didn't know the original title, never even seen the movie, just now that it exists and like the title) and was surprised to stumble about that huge post about the absurdity of a discussion on religious quotes. And when scrolling down I could hardly find ind such a discussion. Post posts seem to be about gramma. Am I missing something here?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/pekarekr

When I read this quote, I think of engaging love to make allowances for other people, rather than rashly judging them. This is a good concept to set limits to revenge and cruelty.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ZaidKhalifa

Actually the Qur'an has a lot of verses similar to this


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PrmExr2487

Men Jesus sa: 《Far, tigli dem, for de vet ikke hva de gjør.》 De delte klærne Hans mellom seg og kastet lodd om dem.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ycUvuSap

"tilgi", ikke "tigli", ikke sant?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JoeWearing

Interestingly an English priest would still be archaic while speaking this, using the Norwegian word order "For they know not what they do".


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Adrian442793

Could "For de vet ikke DET de gjør" be correct? (It's marked as wrong.)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TARDISToni

I third this. In other lessons/comments, we've been told that hva is an interrogative - that is, a question word - and generally should not be used to head dependent clauses in sentences like this, that det is generally better. So I'm wondering what makes this sentence different.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/millicow

I wondered this too


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/eightbitness

Probably it was marked "wrong" due to the citation. I put "det de gjør" as well.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Adrian442793

What I now think about this... I haven't seen a single instance in this course where "vet" is followed by "det". It's always "hva". So, "Vet takes hva" is the easiest rule of thumb.

The way I'd conceptualise this generally is that "vet" introduces an indirect question, and that indirect questions take "hva". So, one can also say, "I know why", "I know how", "I know when" -- one can use other question words after "to know".

This characterisation is probably controversial though. I think that, for something to be an "indirect question", maybe a lot of people would say that you need an obvious question word in the main clause (like "å spørre"), or the main clause itself needs to be a question.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Nic698651

I started the sentence with "for" and it wanted "fordi", are they not interchangeable? While I am typing this the Duolingo page has "for de vet ikke hva de gjor", so I'm none the wiser. I did not get the reference to anything biblical, I just thought it was an archaeic sentence starting with an ungrammatical conjunction.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Deliciae

They're both acceptable here, but require different word orders. This is because "for" is a conjunction used to tie together two main clauses, while "fordi" is considered a subjunction, which triggers another word order. It's tricky!

"For de vet ikke hva de gjør"
"Fordi de ikke vet hva de gjør"

Adrian has posted an explanation regarding the word order above, and here is another one in Norwegian - with sentence examples: https://norskfordeg.no/ressurser/norsk-for-deg-grammatikk/helsetninger-og-leddsetninger/


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Amin663889

According to my dictionary, "for" and "fordi" are both "konjunksjon og subjunksjon." So, what's the reason for the word order in the two sentences, one beginning with "for" and the other with "fordi"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Adrian442793

A conjunction is a joining word. Subordinating conjuctions (subjunctions -- "subjunksjoner" in Norwegian) are one type of conjunction. Coordinating conjunctions ("sideordnende konjunksjoner") are another.

Subjunctions create a dependent clause. Coordinating conjunctions join two clauses at the same level of dependency.

"Fordi" is sometimes written as "for di". In that context, it's a subjunction.

But "for" by itself, when used as a conjunction (rather than a preposition), is a coordinating conjunction, not a subjunction.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Amin663889

Thank you. I agree with you but this is what you can find in ordnett:

for konjunksjon og subjunksjon

(årsak) because

EKSEMPEL ● han dro hjem, for han følte seg ikke bra he went home because he didn't feel well

fordi konjunksjon og subjunksjon

because

EKSEMPEL ● han drog hjem fordi han var trett he went home because he was tired


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/capitami

I used "kjenner" instead of "vet", and it said it was wrong. Can't really understand why, help would be greatly appreciated. Full sentence was "For de kjenner ikke hva de gjør".


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/griffindd

kjenne is for familiarity, especially of people, when you "know someone". vet is for facts. What they do is a "fact" so you have to use vet.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/askepka

Why doesnt V2 apply here? In both parts actually. Can someone say something more about the whole V2 concept?
I end up almost always guessing or just remembering whole sentences, I can't come up with everything on my own..


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Adrian442793

Well, if the "V2 rule" is "The verb is always in the second position in a Norwegian sentence", then it's wrong. Forget the V2 rule!

Main clause:

  • Normal word order in the main clause is subject-verb-adverb-object.
  • If you add a conjunction (like "Og", "Men", or in this case "For") to the start, it doesn't change the basic word order. (It doesn't change word order in English either: "I came home", "And I came home".) And that's why the V2 rule doesn't apply.
  • There are some exceptions to normal word order in main clause. For instance, you might invert the word order if you're asking a question ("Kommer du hjem?"). And, importantly, you invert the word order if you put an adverb at the start of the clause ("Plutselig kom jeg hjem").
  • You can also swap the adverb and object around if you want to emphasise the adverb ("Jeg kom hjem plutselig!").

Subordinate clause (like "hva de gjor" here):

  • Normal order is subjunction-subject-ADVERB-verb-object.
  • Verb is rarely in second position in a subordinate clause (usually there will be a subjunction, like "hva", and then a noun in front of the verb). That's why the V2 rule doesn't apply here either.

Putting subordinate clause before main clause:

  • So, you can say, "I'm sad when he goes", or "When he goes, I'm sad". In the first case, it's all expected word order, "Jeg er trist nar han gar". In the second case, putting the subordinate clause before the main clause has the same effect on word order as putting an adverb at the start of a main clause: you invert verb and subject. "Nar han gar, er jeg trist."

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/askepka

Thanks! However V2 applies always, there're just words, like adverbs, taking place zero (despite still not getting the thing I read lots of explainations and that notion keeps appearing). It makes more sense than saying the role doesn't apply bc there have to be some rules.. But how is er du kommer hjem? even a thing?? I'm pretty sure it should be kommer du hjem?.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Adrian442793

You're right! And you're also right about "er du kommer hjem"! I'll make an edit so that it doesn't confuse anyone.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ghostofthefuture

This rule is why I will never Master Swedish or Norwegian. There appears to be no consistency. Of course, I'm an English speaker so I have little room to judge. LOL


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Klgregonis

Truly, the only rule in most languages that is 100% accurate 100% of the time is that there are exceptions to all rules, including the rule that there are exceptions to all rules. I find it easier to learn the rules first, so that the exceptions stand out, then learn the exceptions as mini-rules of their own.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/muiscool

I am not religious and I think this is a beautiful quote with a nice meaning.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Loopdeloop13

shouldn't the V2 rule apply here? so that the second part of the sentence should have the verb in 2nd position? "hva gjør de"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/yanismrt

As far as i know V2 rule only works when dependent clause comes first in the sentence. In the one above there are two main clauses.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Shelby27519

I find it funny that when duo posts a homosexual line, some comments say how wonderful it is that Duo supports them. Even though those translations only apply to the <1% of the world who is gay, but when it is a bible quote that applies to billions around the world, those same people commenting are so quick to condemn and say it infringes on their rights. Ha! What a joke


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/LtCorsair

I just read through every single comment on this post that appears on pc and have not seen a single complaint about translating the bible verse. I do, however, see several talking about "all the comments complaining about the bible verse being here". Can you screencap any of these complaining comments that are supposedly in abundance?

One thing I do feel is worth pointing out, all the comments talking about how everyone is complaining about this post all mention both:

1) That there are lots of comments complaining about this post even though I can't find any.

2) They mention that the people who comment here complaining about this exercise (again, I can't see any of those comments) are the same people who are posting about how awesome it is that Duo posts progressive translation exercises (even though there is no way to search through someone's profile to see what comments they have left that I know of).

I would like to note though that in every single duo exercise that even hints at LGBT I have found multiple comments about people complaining even though Norway is a very LGBT place.

And a correction, the LGBT population makes up a lot more than <1% of the population.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/aimoooooo

I am a bit confused about when to use gjør, when to use gjøre and when to use gå - am I right in thinking they all mean 'do/go'?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/enwda

Å gjøre == to do, or to make

Jeg gjør == I do, or I make

Å gå == to walk, or to go

Jeg går == I walk, or I go


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/myles_to_go_

What is the difference between hva and for? I put for and it marked it wrong. Full sentence was "For de vet ikke for de gjør."


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/millicow

"Hva" = "what" From what I understand, "for" generally means "for". (it might have some other uses depending on context, though; these words are confusing) So, you typed "for they know not for they do"


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rose634814

I keep thinking I add an 'e' for plural verbs so I guessed verb form 'vite' her. De vite. Is this an exception ver?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Deliciae

Yes, "å vite" is a highly irregular verb, in the present tense as well as others.

å vite - vet - visste - har visst

Men nå vet du det. :)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/NerissaKis

"For they know not what they do"


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/LtCorsair

I just read through every single comment on this post that appears on pc and have not seen a single complaint about translating the bible verse. I do, however, see several talking about "all the comments complaining about the bible verse being here". Can anyone screencap any of these complaining comments that are supposedly in abundance?

One thing I do feel is worth pointing out, all the comments talking about how everyone is complaining about this post all mention both:

1) That there are lots of comments complaining about this post even though I can't find any.

2) They mention that the people who comment here complaining about this exercise (again, I can't see any of those comments) are the same people who are posting about how awesome it is that Duo posts progressive translation exercises (even though there is no way to search through someone's profile to see what comments they have left that I know of).


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/redactedname8112

Jesus Christ was here


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/EkaKevin92

I almost forgot that Norway is a christian country. (Even though they are one of the most atheistic countries in the world)

Learn Norwegian (Bokmål) in just 5 minutes a day. For free.