Because they are cognates (that is, have a related root) but are not the same thing. "Advokat" means "lawyer," not "advocate."
shoulnd't 'en advokat' translate to 'an attorney', instead of more general 'lawyer'?
I think the word comes from french "avocat", which means lawyer/barrister, whereas I think an attorney (comes from old french) is somebody who does law, not necessarily a lawyer/barrister
It is in fact wrong to use the article here. In Danish it is Jeg er lærer (I am a teacher) The Danish language is falling apart with all these foreign influences. It is great to be able to speak other tongues, but one should not forget how to speak one's one language properly. No offence, this is a great tool to learn a language for free, but it does have its faults.
why a lawyer? because in danish they do not use "a" or "an" for the professions, but here it is said "en advokat".
In American English the words lawyer and attorney mean the same thing. In England, as i understand, they are different as between barristers who are lawyers admitted to plead before the bar for clients versus attorneys who advise snd prepare legal documents. In America all are called lawyers or attorneys or attorney at law. It would seem to me that both attorney or lawyer should be accepted for "en advokat. "
They pronounced "advokat" very oddly. It sounded forced, the "t" sounded off.