1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Byxorna är för små."

"Byxorna är för små."

Translation:The trousers are too small.

November 24, 2014

23 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ViolentRed

Common phrase after the holidays...


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/gngrbeard

Growing up in Minnesota we always said things like "Oh, for sad!" or "Oh, for cute!" which mean "oh, that's really sad/cute" or "oh, that's too sad/cute". I wonder if that usage has its roots in the Scandinavian heritage we have in Minnesota? Either way, the usage of 'för' in this example made me think of home and smile.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ethanxman

Is små the plural form?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Zmrzlina

Yes. Liten is very irregular.

Check out the declension on http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/liten#Swedish for full insight into all forms.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Celcel94

Honestly it should be 'pants'..


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/_ginzburg

Why "should"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/thorr18

Pants is accepted.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Shiraz668

Couldn't be translated to ( the pants are for small persons maybe? )


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DzmitryElVikingo

That's an interesting point, but I guess you'd need to have an another one word following 'små' (persons or people). I'm not sure though.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

You're right, in theory it could work, but we don't tend to use 'små' as a nominalized adjective very often, especially without an article. So in practice it doesn't work in this case.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Samantha_R.

How do we recognize för as "too" then?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

Um, I just said that you can tell here because we don't really use små as a nominalized adjective. If it had said Byxorna är för små barn, you could have been sure it would have been 'The pants are for small children'. So as a rule of thumb, when it's för + just an adjective, you can assume it's too, but when you have för + adjective + noun, it'll be för. (This is a bit simplified and won't cover every case, but it's a start.)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DzmitryElVikingo

Oh, I see. Well, thank you for the clarification.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JavadMousa3

What is wrong with .....the pants are very small


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/thorr18

They could be too small without being very small. They may even be very large but still too small.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Emily_Matthias

Ouch! Good point though


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/gigiejo

why is "små" here an adverb? it is an adjective in English, is it something about the preposition that it becomes an adverb in Swedish?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Zmrzlina

It is an adjective here too. But the adverb taught in the sentence is för in the sense of too.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/SthhitPragya

How do we recognize "för" here as "too" ?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/thorr18

Generally, because it precedes just an adjective, rather than preceding an adjective + noun. See the other comments for detail.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/adrianxu_

Can you say here : "The trousers are so small" ?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/thorr18

They could be a little too small for some particular purpose without being "so small".

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