1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Jag hade inte en tanke på de…

"Jag hade inte en tanke det!"

Translation:I had no thought of that!

November 20, 2014



The Swedish and English versions don't match up, and it's sometimes difficult to know when one should give a literal translation and when one should provide a more "natural" sounding one.

In this case, if the "correct" answer is to not be a literal translation then the current "correct" doesn't sound very natural. "I had not thought of that" is probably more how I would say it, or "I had not given it a/any thought".


I generally agree, but "I had not thought of that" translates much better into Swedish as Jag hade inte tänkt på det, or more often in the past tense: Jag tänkte inte på det. That sentence actually also features in the course.


I'm actually unclear on the usage of this sentence. Is the meaning:

  • I hadn't thought of that (used in a situation where someone present an new idea which you hadn't considered)


  • I thought no such thing/I wouldn't think of it (used in a situation where you want to make it clear that you did not have a particular thought and as such had no intention of doing something.)


  • Joe: Hey Bob, if your internet isn't working, try restarting your modem.
  • Bob: Oh ya! I hadn't thought of that!

  • Joe: I saw you looking at my cookie. You were thinking of eating it!

  • Bob: No! I thought no such thing!


The second alternative is the right usage. As I as a Swede ge the context


I think an argument could be made that in English "I had no thought of that" only has the second meaning.


In a previous lesson a clear distinction was made between

  • ingen = no


  • inte en = not one.

If memory serves me right, mixing them was not accepted as an answer.

Why wouldn't this be translated as Jag hade ingen tanke på det?


It's just not idiomatic Swedish, but we accept both "not a" and "no" when translating to English. Someone has turned off the "translate into Swedish" option for this exercise - I suspect it's for this very reason. It's a very good phrase to know, so I don't want to remove it entirely, but it's certainly not easy to teach well on Duolingo.


I feel like this is a difficult translation between english and swedish - it's more useful as an idiom, because it doesn't directly translate well (which makes it a difficult Duolingo sentence).


The vocalization sounds to me more like "dig" than "det". Is it just me?


Odd that "I had not a thought of that" was not accepted, whilst I was offered instead "I had not 1 thought of that."


The "convert one to 1" feature truly is baffling at times. I've added "a" as an alternative now.


Why isn't "I hadn't thought that" accepted?

  • I hadn't thought (of) that = Jag hade inte tänkt (på) det
  • I had no thought of that = Jag hade inte en tanke på det

I mean, they're obviously close but they're not quite the same thing. :)


when does 'det' get intepreted as 'that'. Is there some rule? like in this sentence, en tanke på det


The line between "it" and "that" can be blurry, but generally speaking, context will make pretty clear - and the course tends to accept both whenever appropriate. That said, if the det is emphasised, it almost always means "that".


i keep hearing 'dig' instead of 'det'. Very difficult to hear the difference. Very frustrating!


It's a common problem for learners, so you're definitely not alone. Keep practicing - you'll get the hang of it eventually! At least it's usually much easier when you have the benefit of context.

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