"Hon har följt med honom hem."

Translation:She has followed him home.

November 29, 2014

This discussion is locked.


As it is, I do not really understand the "med" part......


Följa = pursue, follow. Makes it sound like she was either stalking him or had to follow him home.

Följa med = follow. Makes it sound like she followed him home because they wanted each other's company.

It's a little nuance, but it can make a difference.


So can I say Hon har följt honom to mean She has stalked him?


Well, depends on the context. These days we've borrowed "stalk" and say stalka. Otherwise you could use förfölja, but that word is problematic too, it implies repression.


So "följa" is just plain old "follow" without necessarily any bad intent.


What about följa efter?


Implies following but not accompanying.


Hej! If I understood well: "följa någon" is not nice, "följa efter någon" is nicer and "följa med någon" is to follow by accompanying.


"Följa någon" is nice if you do it on twitter, but generally not nice afk. But yes. :)


So why doesn't "She came home with him" work? If följa med means to accompany, come home with is the same thing.


It's because the verb Föjla needs to be followed by the particle Med. The verb is actually att föjla med. Like hälsa på or tänka på, etc.



The voice is not quite perfect on this sentence, as of September 25th, 2017, so I've taken the liberty of re-recording it.

följt med is effectivelly a particle verb and should be stressed on med.

Please find a correct recording on http://duolingo.vydea.io/762db2bd98b74619a4d7c87545e3d292.mp3

For more info on re-recordings, please check the info thread: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/23723515

Thanks for listening. Ha en bra dag! :)


Hey devalanteriel! Just a silly question, by the text to speech sound system I thought med sounded something like "me-add", but by your audio and a song I was listening to, it sounds more as "meh". Which one is the correct? Meh, right


The d is indeed most commonly skipped, but it's not wrong to include it.


Would "She has gone home with him." be a better translation here?


I think that would be more idiomatic English, maybe they’re trying to not steer away from the Swedish sentence too much, but it should at least be accepted in my opinion.


Would "She has gone home with him." be a better translation here? i agree with this. the "correct solution" would be implying that she was stalking him.


I wrote "She has accompanied him home," and that was accepted. I think that's probably the closest translation that also sounds natural in English. The only problem is that most English speakers would not use "accompany" in casual conversation - it makes it sound a little bit like a police report!


I agree that "she has accompanied him home" is a better translation than "She has followed him home". To me, "she has followed him home" doesn't have any sense of accompanying at all.

I wrote "she has accompanied him home", and while it was accepted, it also suggested "she has followed him home", as though that's a slightly better answer. But I think that "she has followed him home" shouldn't really be accepted, since it leads us to think that it means ... well, that it means "follow" vs "accompany".

"follow along with" is probably the closest to "följ med", but "she has followed along with him home" sounds very weird.


Besides, many of us would assume then that she gave him a lift home in her car.


"to accompany someone home" does not imply giving someone a lift.


I use the word 'accompany'.


I tried out "She has gone home with him" and it was accepted. Sept 16, 2017.


does the "j" pronounced in "jöljt"?


I'd say yes, ever so slightly, but it's just barely audible. At least that's for me - I would have pronounced fölt a tiny bit differently. But other natives may just skip the sound completely.


Wouldn't "She has followed him to home." work here?


You wouldn’t say “to home” here in English. Just like you would say “He is going home” not “He is going to home”.


Thanks! Then my English is failing me. I realize that it sounds more natural without the "to" here but I can't pin point why. Do you mind giving me an explanation why?


“Home” can either act as a noun, or as an adverb meaning “to or towards one’s home”. The adverb use is most natural in this sentence: “She followed him home.” You could use it as a noun, but then it also needs an article/determiner of some sort, e.g. “She followed him to his home.”


But doesn't "följa med X" mean "bring X" or "come with X"?


It can be implied, like e.g. "wanna come with me?" might in English, but it doesn't mean it explicitly.

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