Yes, and often a little bit faster. Don't worry though, soon enough you'll have trained your ear to grow accustomed to it.
since neutral öl(et) means beer as a beverage or concept and common öl(en) means a beer one is drinking or a bottle of beer shouldn't it be ölen here?
You're almost right. Here he's not drinking it. So it's a rhetorical universal beer.. THE freudian beer.
Also half- kidding of course.
Oh ok. I'm just wondering cause in my native tongue (Italian) and likewise in English you would say "he doesn't drink beer" to mean he's a non-drinker (or that he hates beer in general), whereas if you said "he doesn't drink the beer" you would mean he has a beer in front of him and that he's refusing to drink it. Do you use the definite form in such cases in Swedish? Cause when I think about it, I can imagine a sentence where you would mean "beer" in general but use a definite article. E.g. I wouldn't drink the beer you'll find in my cellar if I were you: it's 30 years old. or The beer he sent us from Munich was the best I'd ever drunk. In these cases I gather you should use öl(et) right? But normally "the beer" with no context means a bottle of beer. So I wonder if it's different in Swedish.
Han dricker inte öl - he does not drink beer (in general) Han dricker inte ölet - he does not drink THE beer (but he might drink another brand of beer)
It's similar to English, really.
I agree with what Joakim says, but if you are to translate "He doesn't drink the beer" you could definitely say "ölen". And that would suggest his beer or the glass in front of him.
Yes, it could be either depending on whether you mean the specific (glass of) beer or the beer in general. On the reverse translation, both are accepted.
It simply isn't needed in Swedish. It may help to just think about the literal translation and getting used to that instead of trying to translate back and forth to English. In this case the literal translation is "He drinks not the beer".
I'm confused... can someone please clearly explain what the difference between "-et" and "-en" is? They both mean "the"
It has to do with the two genders of nouns. If the gender is utrum you use the ending -en or -n: bil > bilen, flicka > flickan. But for neuter (neutrum) words you use -et or -t: hus > huset, öga > ögat.
How do we differenciate between "he does not drink beer" and "he is not drinking beer"? Basicalliy "verb-inte" in swedish is sometimes present continuous and some times its not. Hope I am making sense!
Where does the 'each word has its own definite,' thing come from. It's not in German or English. Is it Finnish?
What do you mean? German has three grammatical genders, as opposed to the Swedish, Danish and Dutch two. It's not a Finnish thing; Finnish influence on Swedish is fairly limited to some loanwords. Instead, it's a common feature in most Indo-European languages.
Thus, English is actually the odd fellow in the Germanic family of languages, having abandoned it altogether. To us, that's just barbaric... ;)
I think that you misunderstood the question; it's not about why there are two genders, each with its own methods of forming definites; it's about why each definite is its own word rather than (as in English or German) a definite article followed by an indefinite noun.
I wouldn't say that the definite form is its own word but just the basic word with the definite marker attached to it. It's the way the Scandinavian languages express it instead of with definite articles.
I can assure you it isn't Finnish because definite is not used and the language does not have different genders :)
I can't remember the lyrics of this word "ölet" It is very different!
hello i hope someone can help me, my friend from Sweden said this sentence is wrong and it should be "Han dricker inte ölen" not ölet and that there is no such word as ölet
"Öl" can be either en or ett, but the meaning changes.
En öl = a glass of beer
Ett öl = a type of beer
so would "he is not drinking beer" be "Han dricker inte ölet" or "han dricker inte ölen" ?
That would be indefinite in Swedish to: han dricker inte öl.
But "he does not drink the beer" is ambiguous depending on what you mean, so both are possible.
Then, as I said, both are possible translation since the information given does not tell us if it's a glass of beer or a kind of beer (although the former is probably more likely).
Since we're using "ölet", does this mean the sentence says he's not drinking a particular variety of beer? Or like if it were a menu item, he would not be picking the "beer" menu item? Like "He is not drinking the beer here"
Is this sentence also equivalent to "He doesn't drink the beer"? As in, he never drinks it?
- Yes, a particular variety of beer or the specific beer that is at hand. But it does not refer to "one specific serving" like in "the glass of beer I just poured him" because then it would be ölen.
- Yes, we don't distinguish between present continuous and ordinary present, so our present covers both of those. So it can mean that he habitually doesn't drink the beer in this bar or something like that.
Im confused so how do you say " he drinks beer" and "he is drinking beer" or are they the same in swedish?
I understand the conceptual difference between ölen and ölet (i think) but in what real world (Swedish) situation would you actually use this? I can think of a couple in English when you might say "he is not drinking the beer" but they are pretty contrived. More common would be "he is not drinking beer" as in no beer of any kind, or "he is not drinking this/that/his beer" as in a specific, single drink. Is "han dricker inte ölet" also a contrived sentence in swedish, just to teach the concept, or a useful everyday phrase?