Because of the rule that says: with nouns ending in unstressed -el or -er, the "e" of the definite ending (-en or -et) is dropped. Thus: en fågel (a bird) : fågeln (the bird) en fjäder (a feather) : fjädern (the feather) ett exempel (an example) : exemplet (the example) ett finger (a finger) : fingret (the finger)
In this case the definite article den/det is not used. The definite suffix -n is enough. If you would use an adjective before fågel, though, it would be used. The pretty bird would be den vackra fågeln.
Just wondering: Shouldn't it be "den vackra fågel"? At least this is how it works in Danish (bird = fugl, the bird = fuglen, the pretty bird = den smukke fugl).
These work a bit different in all the Scandinavian languages. Swedish uses the suffix with den/det (Dan vackra fågeln), but not with min/din/etc (Min vackra fågel), while Danish uses it with neither and Norwegian uses it with both.
I can't differentiate the sounds between fågel and fågeln. Anyone who could help me, please?
I'm not a native speaker, so take this with a grain of salt:
From what you understand (fågel and dricker), the sentence translates either to "a bird is drinking" or "the bird is drinking". Since you cannot omit the indefinite article (en/ett), "a bird is drinking" would be "en fågel dricker". Since this is very different from what you hear, it can only be "the bird is drinking", which translates to "fågeln dricker".
Apart from that, your listening comprehension will improve over time.
The slight inflection in the voice make it sound like the bird has a drinking problem