The word "snälla" can mean alot of things and it's use is very contextual. A direct translation cannot be done. In this case "Please don't!" is a better translation of the sentence since "No, please!" is rarely used in English.
Example of uses:
- "Snälla" can be used when to request or beg for something. "Snälla sluta gnälla" = "Please stop whining" or "Snälla gör det inte" = "Please don't do it".
It's use shouldn't be equated with the word "please" in all situations.
"Yes, please" is not "Ja, snälla". "Yes, please" = "Ja, tack". In this case, when someone offers you something then you can accept by saying "Ja, tack".
Snäll is also an adjective that means nice or kind. Snäll is singular and snälla is plural. "The teacher is nice/kind" = "Läraren är snäll".
Please bare with me for what I'm gonna say right now hahaha It's never "No, please" that doesn't make sense. It's "No! Please!" There's a big difference to be made right here. And it's not because it is not coonfusing to you, that it is not confusing for other people. Good for you if you understood, but not everyone did and it's very comprehensible.
Just chiming in here. "Yes please" or "no thank you". "No, please" makes zero sense.
And why test someone on words they haven't encountered yet? Is there some dodgy randomisation going on, to ask someone what the translation is without having first encountered it the other way around?
I'm sorry but that's wrong and it doesn't happen all the time. I can honestly say that in my 65 years I have never heard a native English speaker say that. The correct response is, 'No, thanks.' 'No, please' is incorrect. It only works if you flesh it out. For example, 'No, please don't give me another slice, I've had enough,' would be OK but just 'No, please,' simply doesn't work.
I totally agree! I've never, ever heard any native English speaker say "No, please" in my life.
I disagree - both ways are fine.
Look, I'm not saying it's the perfect translation by any means. As Erik noted above, "Please don't!" is a more idiomatic translation by far. But if we put that as the default, the reverse translation exercise gets weird instead. I'm just pointing out that the translation given is not incorrect, just an unidiomatic tool to teach the Swedish.
I would never ever understand this sentence because no and please just don't go together in native English. If you won't listen to a native speaker then ask yourself why there are so many comments expressing confusion. This is not English usage in any way. I am a native speaker, translator and professional linguist but don't believe me, believe the first 5 native speakers you ahow the phrase. They will tell you it is not a natural or meaningful combination.
This is a totally niche example. Just because one would understand (guess the intention correctly) in that instance doesn't make it good or natural English. These words never go together in English and make no idiomatic sense. It sounds like a clear foreign language mistake so I am glad it will be removed.
Again, I didn't argue that it's in any way idiomatic. You claimed that you "would never ever understand this sentence", so I provided a simple counter-example. Whether it's a "totally niche example" is hardly relevant to that argument.
Please be aware that we do feature a lot of less idiomatic English throughout the course. This is mostly because of the way Duolingo's backend is built, where what we put as a default English translation turns into what you get as a "translate into Swedish" exercise. Since the point of quite a lot of exercises is to teach a specific Swedish sentence construction, we frequently need to enter unidiomatic options, or run the risk of not being able to teach the construction.
That's not to say that it's always the best option - clearly, sentences like these illustrate how the system fails at times, and I've made several thousand changes to the course just this year, based on user input.
I'm sure if you watch a horror movie and the subtitles say "No, please!" instead of "No! Please!" you would understand perfectly what is meant.
The reason people are confused, here and on the reverse exercise thread, is largely that they expect the phrase to mean "No thanks", which it doesn't.
Clearly, this is a concern to us. Any sentence with high error percentages needs to be reevaluated continuously. And frankly, this sentence probably won't survive the next tree because I don't like it either. :)
Yes: they're not just letters with accents - they're letters in their own right! In other words, "å" is as different from "a" as "b" is from "d".
This also means that using the wrong letter will almost always change the meaning completely. For instance, höra is "hear" but hora is "prostitute".
Quoting myself from above:
And frankly, this sentence probably won't survive the next tree because I don't like it either.
Unfortunately, removing sentences from the current tree is not technically advisable. But it's been marked for revision, meaning there's a large chance it wont make it to the next version.
Going through the answers above, it looks like snälla is used to ask for something - In this case asking to not have something, or for someone not to do something. I gather that it means 'kind', so could be seen as like 'if you'd be so kind' on English. Going by that, you can also use it in sentences asking for something specific - 'kindly pass the salt'. Someone also said that you can use it to describe someone as kind.