1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Efter att hans fru hade dött…

"Efter att hans fru hade dött blev han aldrig glad igen."

Translation:After his wife had died, he never became happy again.

March 2, 2016

24 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Kats437366

I would say was never happy again rather than never got happy again. It sounds a bit clunky


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

That would be var in Swedish though.


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

I agree though. The use of "got" here sounds a bit off in English.


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

Now that I'm a contributor again, I've at least removed "got" as a default translation. I've also marked the sentence for exclusion from the next tree, so that we can replace it with something better instead. :)


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

Yeah this awful, I struggled and I had the word blocks for this, it's phrased so badly


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

How come "att" is used here?


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

Whenever efter is followed by a verb phrase, you need the att as well.


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

This reminds me of "Up" animated movie...and this song...the song is in Malay...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f3sjUAwZzc


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

Reminds me of "En man som heter Ove".


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MicMac75

One of the best films I've seen!


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/NicoleMuir4

This is not something that anyone would ever say in English. The phrase should be something like " He was never happy again"


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

That is also accepted, but if we put that as the default, you'll never be asked to translate into this very idiomatic Swedish sentence.


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

Why "blev" is before "han"?


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

The sentence starts with the subclause, so the verb in the main clause moves to go directly after it because of the v2 rule.


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

Is it necessary to start the second clause with the verb? Could I say "(...), han aldrig blev glad ingen"?


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

It's completely necessary, mainly because you're actually in the main clause the entire time, in a sense. Efter att hans fru hade dött is a complete unit, which means that the verb which comes after it is actually in second position, following the v2 rule.


[deactivated user]

    Is it possible to say "efter att hans fru dog ...."? It sounds stilted in English to use the past perfect tense. Furthermore, as someone else commented, "got happy" is not good English either.


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

    Yes, although the Swedish sentence works better in the past perfect.


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

    Whilst there's nothing wrong with the use of "glad" here wouldn't "lycklig" make more sense?


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

    That depends on whether he was lycklig before.


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

    Can you say, Efter att sin fru hade dött...


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/James704885

    So clunky and why is att after Efter?

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