"Byxorna är för små."

Translation:The trousers are too small.

November 24, 2014

22 Comments


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

Common phrase after the holidays...

December 14, 2014

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.

March 4, 2017

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

Is små the plural form?

November 24, 2014

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.

November 24, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/seaeagle5

Tack sa mycket.

January 25, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Celina592592

Honestly it should be 'pants'..

July 20, 2019

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

Pants is accepted.

July 22, 2019

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

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

May 31, 2015

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.

March 26, 2016

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.

May 14, 2016

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

How do we recognize för as "too" then?

June 6, 2016

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.)

June 6, 2016

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

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

May 15, 2016

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

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

March 16, 2019

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.

March 16, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/crashedin2

Ouch! Good point though

July 29, 2019

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?

September 23, 2015

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.

September 23, 2015

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

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

May 24, 2016

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.

June 14, 2016

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

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

April 26, 2019

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

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

April 27, 2019
Learn Swedish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.