Wouldn't "Are you with me?" be acceptable here?
Also, I have to agree with the first comment above, "Are you at me" doesn't resemble anything I've ever said or heard in english.
No, it would not be acceptable.
Are you with me would be er du med mig. The word ved means by or at, even though it sounds a bit like with :)
The accepted translations for this sentence are currently:
- Are you where I am?
- Are you by me?
- Are you next to me?
- Are you next to my place?
- Are you next to where I am?
- Are you by me?
- Are you by my place?
- Are you by where I am?
- Are you near me?
- Are you near my place?
- Are you near where I am?
- Are you close to me?
- Are you close to my place?
- Are you close to where I am?
- Are you close by me?
- Are you close by my place?
- Are you close by where I am?
- Are you at my place?
Hopefully that gives you a sense of what is meant by this sentence, which is a bit hard to translate accurately into English. If anyone has ideas for more/better translations, I'm all ears!
are you beside me? are you by my house? are you in my vicinity?
I'm wondering how much overlap there is between "ved mig" with "ved siden af mig"?
Thank you. I added "my house". The other ones are drifting a bit too much away from the meaning, I think :) Even "near" and "close" are pushing it, in my opinion.
The meaning of er du ved mig?, as best I can describe it, is asking whether you are where I currently am, or where I live. The first one is a bit silly, since you would normally be able to tell whether someone is right where you are.
Asking er du ved siden af mig? asks if you are, right now, physically next to (not in front of or behind) me.
the verb 'ved' and the preposition 'ved' is just spelled the same way, but are not the same word ...
Do you stand by me? - are a English phrase when seeking support. Is there anyt mening of support in the Danish phrase?