Can someone please clarify for me - is "mina" in this case because pants or trousers are considered a pleural?
Yes,"mina" is because "byxorna" is in plural. You can say trousers in singular "byxa" and then it would have been "min" (but refering to trousers in singular is unusual in Swedish).
thanks! that's so strange that pants are usually referred to as a pleural!
Originally, a byxa referred to a hose leg. Later, the hoses were joined and thus became trousers - or byxor.
Is that related to why the English call them "Pants" instead of "a pant"?
That's the Americans. :p We call them trousers instead of a trouser for exactly the same reason as the Swedes do. Pants are an undergarment here.
Yes pants are undergarments in the UK, however boxer shorts are a type of undergarment that men wear. Boxer shorts can be also be called "pants" or shortened to "Boxers" just to confuse matters!
Not to be a smart-arse, but it is "plural", not "pleural" . Pleural is a medical term "belonging ti the diafragm (pleura)" (the muscle that cramps when you have hiccups). Cheers!
Actually - to be a smart-arse - the pleura are the membranes around the lungs. It is these that get inflamed during pleurisy. Nowt to do with the diaphragm. :o)
Not really. It's the same in English. You say pants are... not pants is. Not as tricky as we might think!
Yes—mina for plural, min for singular.
- Byxorna är mina.
- Byxor är mina.
- Byxan (whatever that is) är min.
- En byxa är min.
You know, I thought about this some more and realised pants are a pleural in english too! a pair of shorts/pants/trousers/etc!
In German one can say "die Buchse" for "the pants". Maybe there is a relation between Buchse and Byxa/Byxor :D
Yes, "Svenskt Etymologiskt lexikon" says that "byxa" comes from an old German word "buxe" coming from "Buck-Hose".
Don't tell me Dutch is one of the only languages which refer to pants as singular? I have yet to find another one.. (Een broek)
It's possible to say en byxa in Swedish too, but it's pretty rare.
PS in French they say un pantalon so you're not alone.
There are other languages that use a singular form. Irish: bríste (brístí for more than one pair); French: un pantalon (des pantalons for more than one pair) - also "un jean" for a pair of jeans. I've also seen "pant" or "trouser" used in singular form in English, mostly in snooty clothing shops that also like to put "the" in front and often an adjective - for example, "the tweed trouser"; "the jogging pant".
I don't hear the "är" in this pronunciation at all! I guess my ear needs some training.
no I think that's true, if a swede pronounces this a bit fast I think they indeed kind of swallow the 'är'
It's there. I think it's because from the "är" to the "inte", the first word just somewhat drowns.
No, ladies’ underpants are ”underbyxor” and males’ underpants are ”kalsonger”
It's an en word and it's possible to use it in the singular too, en byxa (= a pair of pants). I personally never use this form but I think it's used more by people who are more into fashion/clothes than I am.
oh, perfect! Thank you so much! =) I saw that the only way to learn words is like that: first I try to understand if they are from the En-word group or Ett-word group, then I write down the indefinite sing, the definite sing, the ind. plural and the definite plural. Since I found this method, learning and remembering Swedish words is easy =) Tack Arnauti!
If this sentence had been "Den byxorna är inte mina." would that mean that we have already been discussing a pair of pants/trousers and i am now saying "those pants aren't mine"? And, if so, how is the meaning different from the way it is here "the pants aren't mine" or is it just a clarification?
It would just be wrong. You can say de byxorna and it would mean 'those pants'. But you have to use the plural article de because byxor is a plural word.
It works like this:
- no front article + definite noun = THE. E.g. boken = 'the book'
- front article + definite noun = THAT. E.g. den boken = 'that book'
- front definite article + adjective + definite noun = THE. E.g. den röda boken = 'the red book'
- demonstrative + adjective + noun = THAT E.g. den där röda boken = 'that red book'
The difference between the definite ('the pants') and the demonstrative ('those pants') is that the definite means 'you know which one I mean', or as you say, we've already discussed them. But the demonstrative is a way of pointing to the object in question. 'those pants over there'
Hope this helps!
Couldn't this translate into "Those pants are not mine" as well? Since they may be referring to a pair of pants across the room?
While I am not a native speaker, I would say "those pants" would be "den där byxor" (Just like "these pants" would be "den här byxor"). Just as in English there is a difference between "the", "these" and "those"...