"I was four years old when I went to Norway."
Translation:Jag var fyra år gammal när jag åkte till Norge.
Would "gick till Norge" also be appropriate here, as an alternative to "åkte till Norge" or "for till Norge"?
Ah thanks - I had mistakenly thought that "gå" and "åka" were completely interchangeable.
Not necessarily if one lives on the border, one would still say I went to Norway even if by foot. So in this (rare) situation 'gick' should be accepted, shouldn't it?
Help! I'm a bit confused. I thought after a mention of 'time', you switch the pronoun and verb. Like;
"Jag var fyra år gammal när åkte jag till Norge." - Why is this wrong?
The idea of "switching" is not helpful. The thing is this: in main clauses, the verb goes in second place in the sentence. In subclauses, the subject goes before the verb.
The main clause is Jag var fyra år … – here, the verb is in second place.
The subclause is när jag åkte till Norge – here, the subject is before the verb.
Long post about Swedish word order here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/8970470
That's because ålder means age, somewhat like in English: you can say "I was four years old" or "I was four years of age", but not "I was four years age".
Is the second 'jag' necessary? Does the subject not carry through the sentence in Swedish?
So there is not this "da" like in danish that you use only if it happened once in the past?
You could have said då instead of när, but it gets a little more formal that way.
Why not "fyra år gammalt"? I am really struggling with when adjectives need the "t" or not.
Thanks for any help!
If you think about it like this: I was four years old - I was how old - I was old – you can see that old modifies I. So since you'd say Jag var gammal, you also say Jag var fyra år gammal.
But if we're speaking about an ett word: Huset är gammalt 'The house is old' – the adjective is in the -t form.