"Det finnes mange parker i byen."

Translation: There are many parks in the city.

[Norgemann123]

Why does it say 'finnes' and not 'finner,' as there is no verb conjugation in Norwegian? Is this a completely different tense? Thanks!

[CJ.Dennis]

There are two very similar verbs: "å finne" = "to find" and "å finnes" = "to be, exist, occur, be found".

The conjugation of "å finnes" is irregular:

• present tense finnes or fins
  - simple past fantes or fans
  - past participle funnes

Reference: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/finnes#Norwegian_Bokm%C3%A5l

[mbRDt7]

Is det finnes used as a versatile phrase here? As in "there are..." and also possibly "can be found..."?

[Dakota_Marz]

Are "det finnes" and "det er" interchangeable? If so i prefer "det finnes"

[Rekov]

In some situations they are, but they have different connotations. It doesn't seem to be exactly the same as in Swedish. For example, "Det är en park" is "It is a park," vs. "Det finns en park" is "There is a park." I'm not sure if it's exactly the same in Norwegian though. My gut instinct is that Norwegians use "er" in more situations than the Swedish use "är," but that could just be the course.

[Dakota_Marz]

I meant to say that i know "det er" means "it is" but it can also mean "there is", i was wondering if i could use "det finnes" to mean "there is" always over "det er", I hope that makes my question more clear. Thanks for your input, and here's to your future year streak! :)

[dilly_dallyer]

I know its old, but Det finnes should be thought of as "There exists many parks in the city", You could also think of it as "One finds many parks in the city" so its not directly interchangeable with "det er".

[ewelina26957]

Why "They're many parks in the city." is not a good answer?

[fveldig]

"They're" = "They are" != "There are"

[ewelina26957]

I'm sorry, I meant there're. But I see already that this is not accepted form in duolingo.

[Evan.S47]

"There're" is not legal or conjuction in English. Like "ain't" is commonly used, but incorrect.

[CJ.Dennis]

No, it's not considered incorrect. It's just really hard to say, especially in quick speech. The incorrect "there's" for plurals is almost universally used because it's much easier to say.

• There are many parks
• There're many parks (correct)
• There is many parks (incorrect)
• There's many parks (accepted)

See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/there%27s#English

Usage notes

Often used in place of there are, almost universally in spoken English, even when there is would sound incorrect.