"Why do you not answer?"
Translation:Varför svarar du inte?
That's also OK, but it puts a strong stress on du, like Why don't you answer? in English. (Implying maybe something like 'Everybody else is answering, why don't you answer too').
Can someone please tell me easy way (if there is any) to learn the proper order of words in sentences? Usually I have all right words but not in right places. Thanks
Svar, like many words in many languages, can play roles in various parts of speech. Throughout these last few Swedish lessons, the use of svar as both a noun and a verb has been presented.
The "infinitive" of the verb (the form commonly seen in dictionaries) of the verb meaning to answer is svara in Swedish. In this sentence svar(a) is a verb -- thus to conjugate, you add an -r to the end of the infinitive svara to obtain: svarar (simple present tense) with a meaning of to answer or respond.
In this example, a demonstrative pronoun (e.g. Varför (why)) is listed first. This is a clue that a clause involving question is likely to follow. Then the independent verb comes second. This is similar to many (but not all) English constructions involving questions. Swedish typically inverts the subject and finite verb in clauses involving questions.
Look at your question: "Why (demonstrative) is (conjugated copula "to be" verb) [...]?" This example is highly similar in construction as the Swedish question here.
Svarar is the verb/doing word of ask. Svar is the noun. i.e. "Why don't you answer [do a thing]" vs "What is the answer [the thing]
It asks to mark ALL correct answers and in this case both the one with "ni" and "du" are correct as "you" could be singular or plural in this sentence.
is varför besvarar du inte wrong? I thought besvarar literally translated to answer.
besvara is transitive, you can besvara [somebody] or besvara [something], where "something" is typically frågan or a synonym. But you can't just besvara.
What is transitive? That is to say, I speak English but have nothing to do with english morphology
A transitive verb takes an object such as a noun, a pronoun, or a phrase. An intransitive verb does not.
So for instance, jag svarar is intransitive because there is no object, but jag besvarar honom is transitive because it takes an object.
Some verbs may take two objects, and these are called ditransitive. For instance: "She gave me a cookie."
And many verbs can be either transitive or intransitive depending on how they're used, e.g. jag äter = intransitive ("I eat"), jag äter kronärtskockor = transitive ("I eat artichokes").
Transitivity is not always expressed in the same way in all languages, but it's a general feature of linguistics. :)
I'm having the same problem with word order. I wrote "varför ni inte svarar" ... Sometimes I feel like I'm just not getting it!
Questions are created by putting the verb before the subject. The only thing that can go before the verb in a question is a question word (like varför in this case).
I had never seen this way of making a question in english before. Is that really correct? Does anyone speak like that?
It would likely be more common in writing than in speech, but it's certainly not wrong or weird.
Think of it like this - naturally you'd probably say "why don't you answer", but try to convert "don't" to "do not" (which it stands for) and you'll get: "why do not you answer"... wouldn't THAT be weird?
I think it would so shifting the "you" in such case actually makes sense :)
I put "då" just for fun, thinking that it emphasizes the need for an answer. Was marked wrong and regretted nothing.
Well, you're not wrong, but it's not a good translation. If the English phrase had said something like "So why don't you answer?" or "Why don't you answer, then?", it would have been more appropriate.