1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "You are women."

"You are women."

Translation:Ni är kvinnor.

November 22, 2014



Ni is the same as Du but it says Du is incorrect


Ni and du are different. Du refers to just one person, ni refers to more people. Since there is plural "women", only "ni" can be used


So Ni is basically Y'all. That makes sense now. I was extremely confused


This sentence seems so cursed


Dude is that u could have seen the sentence that it says You are women.If it was singular it will be Your are a women but if it is prural it will be You are woman.The Word You can be use as singular and prural


I think I had a stroke reading this


Ni is 2nd person plural, Du is 2nd person singular! It has to be plural because otherwise the sentence "you are womEn" would not make sense (would be "you are A womAn" if it was singular).


Yes! I only lived in sweden for a while but we always said Du not Ni when I mean You specifically


Ni is used for plural Number and Du is used for singular number


I don't know why people ignore how annoying it is that English doesn't have a second person plural. "Y'all" is what I use. Sure, it's just a contraction. Still, at least it somewhat addresses the issue. The problem with most language majors is that they tend to be "conservatives" on a given language, and prevent further evolution of said language.

I think we should instead refer to the suggestions of linguists, which may allow language to evolve in a logical and efficient manner.

Spelling in English is abysmal. Why not make it phonetic? Why not make the grammar rules more streamlined, instead of regular irregularities? Maybe one day, these issues will be addressed. Unlikely in my lifetime, though. :/


Language evolves with subtlety over time, including the English language. If you went back in time two-hundred years ago you would likely have a hard time understanding, not because linguists allowed language to change, simply because language flows like a river.

Some languages have changed little over time; I may be wrong but I believe Arabic to be an example.


Have you heard about the Shavian alphabet? I just couldn't help thinking of it when I read your comment. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shavian_alphabet


I've not heard of this, it's very interesting. :] However, it's not the availability of a phonetic scrip, (because I know how to read and write IPA), it's convincing people that it would actually be easier to use said script. :P The problem is language majors (not linguists) that do their best to control and 'conserve' a language as-is, without letting it evolve in a logical fashion.


Why do you think it would be easier - or indeed better? English's idiosyncrasies hold its history: for centuries after the Norman invasion it was the language of serfs and the pre-invasion literary tradition was lost whilst French and Latin were the languages of the educated oppressors. So grammar rules and spelling were lost to a degree (standardised spelling was the aim of Samuel Johnson dictionary some 600 years later).

Equally, many of the spellings in English are faithful to the language of the words' origin...English is basically a mixture of Old German and Old French, with some Scandinavian, remnants of Brythionic and Celtic languages, and a bunch of borrowed words - like bungalow, shampoo and pyjamas, to name but three.

How would a phonetic script deal with homophones? here, hear! there their they're.

Investigating why the language is the way it is leads to fascinating discoveries out our past - why would anyone want to destroy a treasure trove of history?

If you want a constructed regular language, use Esperanto.

And if you want singular and plural "you" in English, let's return to using thee and thou.....


I remembered a piece of news about some European Portuguese speaker oppose the spelling reform of Portuguese in the same way as Castilian Spanish. Without the reform, they had to spell the placename "Bangkok" in a long string of characters (I read that once in TV in Macau) like "Bangquotte"


Im not quite sure of the differences of used with Du and Ni. Same with är, could someone help a little or direct me to something that explains. Thanks Jesse


Du is singular and Ni is plural....now i realize why english is probably the easiest language....


So ni is like vous in french? Is it also used to be more formal/polite, or can one use du for that too? Just trying to wrap my head around it, english only having one 'you' word makes other languages confusing!


No, ni is not more polite, just plural. You can read more on Swedish politeness here.


I believe "Ni" is like "Vos" in Spanish, used for second person plural


What is the difference between du and ni?


Du is singular. Ni is plural.


When do I use ni or du?


You use "du" for one person and "ni" for more than one.


As far as I know, Ni are the polite form of Du. Correct?


Can 'Ni' be used as a plural you and formal you, like the German 'Ihr'?


Not really.


This discussion handles the topic, with a bit of discussion among a couple of native speakers on the subject.


'Ni' can in theory also be used like the german 'Sie'; formal singular you. However, you only use that if you would talk to the king or such. You would sound very archaic in other situations.

As a side note, I actually have been referred to as 'Ni' in a couple of visits to some stores recently, always by younger staff. They probably think they are being very polite, but to me it sounds very strange, and this usage sounds like a relic from a hundred years ago..

(Also, I lied. If you would meet the king you should actually say "Ers Majestät", referring to him in third person.)


How can I differentiate plural and singular forms if writing is same?!


"Are women" is plural.


would varsagod not be valid here?


Not at all. Varsågod means you're welcome as in the polite phrase you say after helping someone out or giving something to someone.


sorry. i have no idea how, but i guess i thought the original phrase was "you are welcome" Not "you are women"


What in the frick? There is no way to tell in this sentence that it wants a plural you.


"You are women." Both "are" and "women" make it clear we are speaking in plural.

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