"Hon äter inte kött."
Translation:She does not eat meat.
17 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
12
And if it is the first sense (she is vegetarian), "she eats no meat" bears the same meaning. So why is "she eats no meat" wrong?
This caught me off guard as well. At least in Midwestern American English, you're just as likely to hear "She eats no meat." as "She doesn't eat meat.", and provided this was the intended meaning from context I'd actually think it makes more sense to translate it as 'She eats no meat.' because that preserved the syntactic structure of the original.
No, it's not. First of all, it's not an English sh-sound. It's a different one. It sounds similar but it's not the same. Compare English sh /ʃ/ to Swedish tj/k /ɕ/.
Generally, k is pronounced /ɕ/ before i, e, ö, ä and y. However, we have a lot of loanwords that makes it a bit harder. For example, "att köra" (to drive) is pronounced with /ɕ/ while "en kör" (a choir) is not. Other examples of this are "keps" (cap) and "kö" (queue/line).