It‘s not from modern German; it’s a parallel formation that developed in both languages.
Even the norwegian course girl disowned that glove. Let's try with the danish one...
what about "this is not my glove", is it necessarily "that"? thank you.
"This is not my glove" would be more accurately translated into "Det här är inte min handske"
"This" implies the presence of the object you're talking about. "It" just implies you are talking about the object.
Why is "mitten" in this sentence not correct? I translated just from the sound and in German both glove and mitten are "Handschuh"
Mittens are gloves that have two sections: one for the thumb and one for the other four fingers. A mitten translates to 'en vante', the plural form is 'vantar'.
Min and mitt both mean 'my'. Min is used before en-words and mitt is used before ett-words. Mig is an object pronoun, like 'me' in English.
Mig is pronounced more like "may" in English and is informally often written mej.
Really why not "Den är inte mitt handske" ? This is my question too !
Because det is separate from handske in this sentence.
Det är inte min handske.
That is not my glove.
Jag äger inte den handsken.
I do not own that glove.
In linguistics terminology, det is a pronoun in the first sentence and an adjective in the second.
It's an article in the second sentence, not an adjective. The reason is that Swedish defaults to det as the general it, as a placeholder subject before the real subject is introduced.
it told me previously hanskar was gloves. if handskar=gloves and handske=gloves then shouldn't handskar=handske???
Can i also say "det är ingen min handske"? (negating the noun "handske" instead of the verb "är")