"I cannot find my socks."
Translation:Jag hittar inte mina strumpor.
Does "hittar inte" mean "cannot find" so you wouldn't need the verb "can/be able to"?
This case is more about the English sentence than the Swedish one. A more literal translation of this sentence would be "I am not finding my socks." which you wouldn't use in English.
However, "Jag kan inte hitta mina strumpor" does also work in Swedish, but it's used in a slightly different context. Like if you have realized that you can't find your socks and are planning on getting new ones.
Yes, but it sounds old and a bit formal to most people. As a beginner, always use 'hitta'. You can't be wrong with that.
Tack för ditt svar! Eftersom jag är en nybörjare på svenska, det är lättare för mig att memorera ords som liknar engelska.
(I hope my heavily English-influenced Swedish makes sense!)
Jag förstår det. Ibland är det svårt för mig att välja rätt ord på engelska av samma anledning.
(Don't worry, I can understand even though some words are out of order ^^)
Hehe, först måste jag lära svensk grammatik! Men nu är jag glad jag förstått din mening utan google :).
Ditt inlägg är kul läsa, tack ;)
I recommend for people to change their facebook and steam(if gamer) to Svenska, helpful to learn more words in context!
Mine is telling me the right answer is "Jag hittar ej mina strumpor" but I've never encountered "ej" in any lesson up to this point. How does this relate to "Jag hittar inte mina strumpor"?
I understand the sentence for i got the question right but my question is would "Hittar" mean find and does "Inte" (yes i know it means like not) but in this sentence would it mean cannot. Also why is "Inte" before certain words like when translated to english the not/inte like the sentence above "Jag hittar inte mina strumpor" when translated to english its "i cannot find my socks" the cannot is before the find and in swedish its after the find? Explain please im lost.
a) Why do we add can when translating into English?
- It's just more natural to say just Jag hittar inte … in Swedish and 'I cannot find' in English. It's totally OK to say Jag kan inte hitta … in Swedish and not altogether wrong to say 'I am not finding …' in English, but the latter is a lot less likely. So in most contexts when we say Jag hittar inte …, you'd say 'I can't find …' in English.
b) Why is inte in that spot?
- This is because of the V2 rule. In all Swedish main clauses that aren't questions, the verb has to go in second place. Once we start out with jag, the verb has to go right after that, hittar, and only then can we have the negation. Actually the negation is after the verb in your English sentence too, because what counts as a verb in this context is the verb that shows time, so that in English, the 'verb' here is can, and not goes after that one too.
I wrote a much longer text about word order here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/8970470
I'm getting a bit confused with the sentence structure now, re where to put "find" and "inte" (and every other word) in sentences. Have we been taught sentence structure, or is that coming up?
I don't know if they're ever too explicit with the rules. It helps to look at other sources as well. Maybe this will help though: Swedish is SVO (Like English) but also V2, (like German and Dutch.) That means that if there's only one verb it always goes as the second element in the sentence. I would also take a wild guess that "inte" never comes before the finite verb (i.e. the first one, and the one that is conjugated).
I'm sorry but I can't answer that question. Probably for the same reason "I find my socks not" doesn't work in English.
It's a good point, and not without reason. The reason I ask is because up to now, I have always seen 'inte' go immediatly after the verb. In duolingo. I have since encountered cases where 'inte' was sandwiching the noun, with the verb being the other bread slice. When I think of an example, I'll post it here.
Because strumpor is a plural, thus you need the plural form mina. You use min for nouns that are en words, and mitt for ett words. Mina is used for all plural words, regardless of whether or not it is en or ett.
Why isn't it "I don't find my socks"? In the Swedish translation is no can, isn't it?
There would be rare occasions when this phrasing would work. For example, if someone doesn't want to look for the socks but wants to order someone else to do so they could say "I don't find my socks. You find my socks." (Like a toddler ordering mom to do it.
It would also be correct to say "I'm not finding my socks" which I might say if I really expected to be able to find my socks and am surprised to be unable to find them. Or if I'm not having any success in finding my socks and I'd like someone else (e.g. my husband) to help me to look for them.
But, most of the time, I would say "I can't find my socks."
I hope that this helps.
Because I don't think "I don't find my socks" sounds very natural in English. Think of this as a translation of meaning, not one of words.
Okej, tack för ditt svar. I sometimes use (English) words wrong. I would have wrote something like "jag kan inte hitta mina strumpor" if I had to translate "I cannot find my socks" (theoretically. Sorry for this sentence. I'm still having troubles with the sentence construction.)
"Jag kan inte hitta mina strumpor" works in Swedish. See my other comment above (near the top).
"I don't find my socks" sounds like a smart alecky way to say, "The socks aren't here." The implication is, "no matter how much I look." "I cannot find my socks" suggests, "I would like some help finding them," and is probably the more useful sentence to learn. ;-)
I wrote -- Jag kann inte hittar mina strumpor and it corrected it to "hitta" -- why? :) Tack!