"You know that I love you."
Translation:Du vet att jag älskar dig.
How can 'du vet att jag älskar er' be correct? It's a mixture of singular and plural forms...
Depending on the context you could for example say that to your wife meaning that she knows you love her and your kids, or any other situation where you are talking to one person and saying you love a larger group they are a part of. I do agree that it may be a bit confusing in an exercise like this though.
With an out-of-context sentence like this it could also translate to "Ni vet att jag älskar er", as in addressing a group and loving the group. "Ni vet att jag älskar er" could also be addressing a 'formal you' and loving that person - a bit odd though being formal and intimate in the same sentence... :)
I would understand if it was a ni/er combination, but the du/er combination threw me slightly.
Back in the days Swedes used to be very polite and would address strangers or people "above" themselves differently than people they knew well, some still do. The pronoun "Ni" is then used instead of "du". It works the same way as "Sie" and "du" in German, and "I" and "du" in Danish I think.
Yeah I understand what 'ni' means and how to use it, but the combination of 'du' and 'er' in the sentence 'du vet att jag älskar er' was the source of confusion.
I agree. 'Du vet att jag älskar er' is, maybe not ungrammatical, but at least inconsistent (unless 'du' = 1 person and 'er' = several). Ni/er, which is normally you (plural), may sometimes be you (singular formal), but i don't think that is very common usage. (Likewise, English historically had 'thou' (cognate to Swedish 'du') for you (sing.) and 'you' for you (pl.); 'you' came to be used for you (sing. formal) and eventually displaced 'thou'.) However, in an expression like 'You know that i love you' or its translation in other languages, both 'you's would in all likelihood refer to the same single person (or, less likely, both refer to the same group of multiple people). So, it should be 'Du vet att jag älskar dig'; dig = object form of du.
Yes, that is right. No subjunctive, no conjugation in person or number. Ever!
It's because att is a relative pronoun here, used to start a relative clause.
I don't know the grammatical terms 100%, but if you think about it in english, it's a different kind of "that".
In this sentence ("You know that I love you") the "that" is a conjuction. You have to say "that" in this sentence, you can't say "You know this I love you" or anything else.
But if "that" is used as pronoun and is interchangeable with "this" or "it", then you use "det". Example: "Jag vet det" - "I know this/that/it". That's how I understand it. I hope that is correct and makes sense?
Comparing it to German, I feel like att=dass, and det=das.
I can't think of a case where they would be synonymous, but they definitely mean different things in this context.
förstår = understand vet = know Not synonymous. The meaning of the sentence would change. "You understand that I love you"
I am confused about when to you use 'du' and when it should be 'dig'. Is it the same difference as 'I/me' or 'she/her'?
att is either the conjunction "that", or the particle "to" which serves as an infinitive marker. It's never the preposition "to", or any other preposition.
Is it possible to leave out the "att" in this kind of sentence like "You know, I love you."? --> Du vet, jag älskar dig?
Only very colloquially. You'd certainly be understood, but it's generally not advisable.
This sentence is not covered in the Conjunction course only when you test out. Same with "He writes that he loves her."