"Svaret er historisk."
Translation:The answer is historical.
Maybe this is a question about English, but what is the difference between "historical" and "historic"? Is there a particular time when one wouldn't use one or the other? And is their a distinction between the concepts in Danish?
Historical means "relating to history", as in "a historical tour through Copenhagen." Historic usually means something closer to "historically important", as in "a historic document." At least that's how I use them.
It seems English here has two words, both adjectives, for the same concept, or almost, where Danish/Swedish has only one. I found these examples: an historic building, an historic moment. within historic times = meaning something worth to remember (whenever it happened, I suppose?). While an historical document, painting, writing is something made long ago, during some historic era. I can't say I notice a very big difference.
There is a difference in the English words, though they sound similar and are often misused even by English speakers. The signing of a treaty is a historic moment (real and significant), while a fictional tale set in the past is historical (related to history, but not significant in itself).
(Cred: I am a native speaker of American English, and a fiction writer and proofreader.)
Is 'historisk' irregular? I guess 'svaret' is neuter, but historisk don't use -t, right?