1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Jag äter."

"Jag äter."

Translation:I eat.

November 18, 2014



Beside Duolingo, I also use forvo.com to check the pronunciation - with have contribution of local people. :)


So I'm guessing that the present form can mean "I eat" and "I am eating" since both translations are accepted


Swedish makes no distinction here, just as you say :)


Actually, there is, although only used for emphasis: "Jag är ätandes".


"Jag är ätandes" looks to me like a literal translation of the English progressive construction. I wouldn't consider it idiomatic Swedish. The progressive in Swedish would more naturally be Jag håller på att äta/och äter or Jag sitter och äter.

The fact that Swedish doesn't make the distinction between progessive and non-progressive, doesn't mean that the language can't express them. It simply means that you don't need to make a choice whether to do so, like in English. "Jag äter" equals both I eat and I am eating.


"Jag är ätandes" is not something anyone would ever say. There is only one present tense in Swedish and it's "jag äter".


The same takes place in norwegian.


Should I pronounce "g" in jag?


Only when articulated. In common speech, the g is not pronounced.


What about the accent over the a in "ater"


It's not an accent, it's a letter itself. The Swedish alphabet has three more letters than the English one, åÅ, äÄ and öÖ.


It is rather curious that in many languages "to eat" and "to am". Like "Er isst" and "er ist" in German, or "on jest" and "on je" in Polish (and Czech uses "je" as "to be") and Russian "есть" in different situations can be a variation of both (like "У тебя есть что есть?", translated to "Do you have things to eat?"). There is something philosophical here in all of that.


For anyone taking spanish, "I" in Swedish sounds a lot like "I" in Spanish to me. Would it be safe to think of the I that way?


That depends on whether it's long or short, mostly.


In Danish there is a distinction between "spiser" og "æder" to name the action of eating. "Spiser" is used for humans and it's civilized, while "æder" is used for animals or very informal/uncivilized for humans or sometimes as an insult towards one that stuffs his/her face like an animal. There is no such thing in English, as "to eat" is universal and with no implications. Is there the same distinction in Swedish?


Swedish doesn't have that distinction either. :)


While "I eat" can be translated to "Jag äter", "Jag äter" is referring more to the act itself, where "I eat" doesn't quite make sense.

"I am eating" is more accurate to describe the act itself.

Sidenote: "Jag äter frukost" (for example) would best translate as "I am having breakfast"


Both ways are, of course, accepted.


What is the differenf between äter= eat and äter= is or am or are eating


Swedish doesn't make a difference - the same translates to both.

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