"Han har på sig handskar."
Translation:He is wearing gloves.
22 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
If I wanted to say "he has his gloves on", how would that be said? "Han har sin handskar på sig" ?
So, would the negative form be "Han har på sig inte handskar" or "Han inte har på sig handskar"? (He does not wear gloves)
I constantly want to write, "He is wearing gloves," why is this wrong?
How can I tell the difference between him currently wearing gloves and the fact he sometimes wear gloves?
It doesn't matter. Swedish doesn't distinguish between the present tense and the present continuous tense.
One of my biggest problems learning Swedish has been forgetting English. It is often very similar but you have to just accept it's not right when you just word for word translate something. Like har på sig..
A year later, but I'm having the same issue. I keep trying to directly translate word-for-word, and that doesn't work. "Har på sig" literally translates to "has on [he/she/it]self." And then you have the word "bär", which means "wearing/bearing/carrying" etc.
It's confusing stuff, yo.
1371
it's so similar to polish! "on ma na sobie rękawiczki" (literally "he has on himself gloves")
How would you say, "He is wearing her hat?" or any variation of people/clothing items?
Would it be: "Han har hennes hatt på." ? Like "He has her hat on"?
Or what is the correct word configuration here?
- 620
I think it would be "han har hennes hatt på sig" You still need to use the complete phrase 'har på sig'
I like how swedish is sometimes similar to russian. På sig would be "на себе ", and there is also "по " which means over, on. So "по себе would be "over themselves" here Although we usually say "носить " instead of "иметь на себе ", and the verb nosit' also means to bring, to hold
Its actually literraly translate is having on him but wearing sounds better off course