"Jag ringer dig i morgon."
Translation:I will call you tomorrow.
59 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
So, just to be clear: If you use present tense verbs, but refer to a time in the future, it makes the translation future tense? So "Jag ringer dig" is "I call you", whereas "Jag ringer dig i morgon" is "I will call you tomorrow"?
Does that also mean "Jag ringer dig i går" is "I rang you yesterday"? I'm guessing no?...
Does it sound wrong if you say "Jag ska ringa dig imorgon" or "Jag kommer att ringa dig imorgon"? I imagine leaving the "ska/kommer att" out is more efficient. But I guess I'm wondering if it sounds wrong or changes the meaning to incude "ska/kommer attt" when you specify a future date in the sentence. .
Now that I think about it:
I'm calling you. = Jag ringer dig.
I'm calling you tomorrow. = Jag ringer dig i morgon.
I'm going to call you tomorrow. = Jag kommer att ringa dig i morgon.
I will call you tomorrow. = Jag ska ringa dig i morgon.
I called (rang) you yesterday. = Jag ringade dig i går. (I think)
"I call you yesterday" and "Jag ringer dig i går" are both nonsense.
So it actually matches up quite neatly with those translations, right? They all make sense in English.
Please correct me if I'm wrong!
(strange duolingo won't let me reply to your last message - so had to post reply to my own)
Your examples are great - thanks so much! " I am calling you tomorrow" makes more sense now.
I hope we can get verification on the Swedish. If these are all acceptable with slightly different meaning. "Jag ringer dig imorgon" "Jag ska ringa dig imorgon" "Jag kommer att ringa dig imorgon"
The two future constructions in Swedish have slightly different meanings. ska always includes somebody's will or intention. Whenever you say ska, somebody wants something to happen. So if I say "Jag ska ringa dig i morgon" there's also the sense that I've decided to do that. This could work for instance if it's a sort of a promise. The construction kommer att has something of a prediction in it. "Jag kommer att ringa dig i morgon" is sort of telling the story of things that are going to happen tomorrow. Both are OK, but the best way of saying it is actually "Jag ringer dig i morgon", with just the present time.
Ok great thanks for confirmation that they all sound ok. Makes it easier as a beginner to not stress too much about which one to use.
I also appreciated a mention of this in the notes in the lesson on Future tense. That it just takes time to know which one is usually used.
I don't understand the distinction between something being a "sort of promise" (ska) versus something "telling the story of what will happen" (kommer att) . Those seem like the same thing to me?
If the "story" of tomorrow includes me calling you then have I not promised to call you?
If I have promised to call you, does not tomorrow's "story" include me calling you?
I'm more confused than before I read your comment. :(
I'm guessing that it's like English. We can say I cook dinner tonight,I am cooking dinner tonight, I'm going to cook dinner tonight, and I will cook dinner tonight. All ways of expressing the future. They're all pretty interchangeable - for beginners - but have slightly different connotations for natives and more advanced speakers. Spanish and Dutch do the same thing.
It is the same in Spanish. You bump into someone in the street and when you say goodbye it's common to say: "Te llamo" (I call you). You don't even add "tomorrow". It's also very common to say "Nos llamamos" ("We call each other", which is something like a promise to be in contact with that person in the future)
That doesn't mean it's the same word for "morning" and "tomorrow". You could also say e.g. "Call me in the evening" to mean tomorrow evening - that doesn't mean that "evening" can be synonymous with "tomorrow". After all, if you say "call me in the [time of day]", you're expecting the other party to not call at some other point of the day.
If you insist on translating literally word for word, which is a terrible practice, you should insist on the course accepting "in morning" since that is what the phrase literally translates to. It does not literally translate to "in the morning" - that would be i morgonen literally, and på morgonen idiomatically.
Now would you kindly be a bit nicer next time? It's somewhat offputting.
I'd suggest reading the rest of the thread, this is explained toward the top, but morgon means morning, i morgon means tomorrow, and i morgon bitti means tomorrow morning. You sometimes need to translate a phrase (in any language) as a single word in English, and vice versa, sometimes a phrase in English is a single word in another language.