I'm really glad there's useful phrases on Duolingo for non-conventional eaters! Thanks for not leaving us out :)
It's estimated that 10% of the Swedish population (of almost 10 million) are actually vegan or vegetarian. Although way too little to break the meat norm of society (yes, I am a biased vegetarian), non-meat dietary choices is a relatively big deal, especially in the bigger cities and/or the university cities.
Really? That's so cool! Scandinavia is on my list of future travels, and I was a little worried that I'd have trouble finding vegan options.
That shouldn't be a problem. :) Most stores have some vegan/vegetarian foods, and most restaurants will at least offer vegetarian meals too.
I was suprised by the great choice of frozen vegetarian meals in stores, even the smaller ones - no idea why but I was afraid that in Sweden I'd be condemned to a diet consisting mainly of cheese sandwiches and fruit :). Swedish soy frankfurters rule, BTW, IMO the are better than those in my country.
That's awesome, I am vegetarian, almost becoming a full-fledged vegan and here in Portugal it's really rare for me to have a meal with family, friends or colleagues without being questioned about my diet choice.
It can't mean that, you have to add a verb like for instance lutar mig to get that meaning.
People like to talk about their interests, especially the ethically-centred ones. Vegans should feel no shame for doing the same. :)
Can you use mot meaning against as in "His hand is pressed against the glass." Or does this kind only mean "opposed to"?
The suggested translation inclues towards ? How can a word mean both opposed to/against and towards at the same time ? And how do i know which one was meant when somebody says it ?
towards is a hint on the word 'mot', but it's not in any accepted translation here.
mot means both 'against' and 'towards'.
The general meaning of mot is about movement in a certain direction. You have similar tendencies for against in English in expressions like lean against something, swim against the current etc. The idea of 'movement in a certain direction' can also be thought of as 'moving against the enemy', so it's logical that mot has both these meanings.
I'm really confused! That's what I hear everyday in tunnelbana: mot Mörby Centrum .. Against or toward? That makes huge difference!
Why so? The subway can't go "against" Mörby, can it?? It's a "movement in a certain direction", and you'd say towards for that one in English.
The sentence before using mot was about walking toward the restaurant. So this is confusing to now see mot meaning movement against!!
My Swedish girlfriend insists that this sentence should be Jag är emot kött. Just sayin'
It's mostly just a matter of taste. Both are OK.
But when used as a verb particle, you normally use emot, e.g. "ta emot" meaning "to receive".
I think the "å" usually sounds longer and more like "oah"... not sure though :)
In English, "I am against eating meat" would be a clearer statement than "I am against meat". Would we have a comparable improvement in Swedish? How would we form a gerund (a noun form of a verb) in Swedish?
Yes, Jag är mot kött doesn't really make sense in Swedish either, in the same way as in English. But we don't have gerunds and we also rarely use participles that way, we tend to use the infinitive instead. So Jag är emot att äta kött would probably be the most idiomatic way of saying it.
Okay, the infinitive construction is familiar enough to English speakers. In English, the infinitive phrase (to do something) functions pretty much like a gerund (doing something), although we instinctively know when to use one or the other in particular contexts. (I am not sure I can explain this thoroughly to someone learning to speak English. When a preposition is involved, as in "against eating meat", then a gerund applies. Sometimes it can go both ways, e.g. "I love to eat meat" and "I love eating meat", with possibly a difference in nuance. But if we change just the verb to "enjoy", then it has to be "I enjoy eating meat", as "I enjoy to eat meat" just doesn't sound right.)
Well, we ought to be thankful that there is no gerund to confuse the issue in Swedish. I expect we will get to know the att+infinitive construction very well.
That the speaker, possibly for some moral or political reasons, thinks eating meat is a bad idea.
Yes, it can be used with directions too. Jag går mot dörren = I walk towards the door.
That only works in sentences like slåss mot/med 'fight against/with' – the meaning doesn't change much in that case, but jag är med kött would mean I am with meat in English.
That doesn't make sense to me, what are you trying to say? Maybe you mean Jag är mot dem som är mot kött = 'I am against the people who are against meat'?
Does 'som' mean both 'like' and 'who'? (As in 'som i en film' and 'Män som hatar kvinnor'?)
That's right. It also means "which" as in Det som jag hatar "That which I hate".
still early days for me (considering that am still not sure of definite and indefinite endings). But was just curious: there's no main clause, subordinate clause? No introduction of a comma; no taking the verb to the last position? Something like this: Ich bin gegen die Leute, die gegen Fleisch sind.
P.S.: this was meant for Arnauti's comment
No, not really. But as I have stated in a previous comment here, emot is used if used as a verb particle.
I just heard 'jag' be pronounced like "jog". Now I'm woundering if i say jag outloud like 'yaw' or 'jog'?
It's very sharp, Michael130691, that you picked up on a suggestion of G at the end of "jag". It occurs to me that this very weak G that we hear may just be a natural artifact of transitioning from the vowel /ɑː/ to the vowel /æː/. I think it would sound very different if one were consciously to make a G sound, which I think a Swede would do only when saying "jag" as an isolated word.
We can experiment with this vowel transition. It's possible to make two clean vowels with a slight break in between. The Swedes, though, have a fluid delivery, not broken up by such gaps in sound. Now, try to keep the sound going as you change from one vowel to the other. You may find that a phantom G just appears by itself.
I am very conflicted as to what the meaning of the sentence should be. The translation for mot says "towards" as well. Would it make sense saying "I am towards meat" in Swedish? Or is there a different way of saying this... Sorry if I am not making sense but it really confuses me
The hints are just hints, if a word can be translated one way in one context, that hint might show up in any context. Since I am towards meat makes no sense, it's easy for you to guess that this is not what the Swedish sentence means.
We tried to switch... thought we could perhaps accustom ourselves to it over time and loved the idea of it... Nope! Ugh, Oatly makes me gag! To be fair we don't consume a lot of dairy anyway but serious credit to those of you who can stomach that stuff!
We didn't have much of a choice when our son turned out to be allergic to cow's milk... :| And my wife's still stilling, so...
Oh that sucks! I quite like almond milk and can stomach soy if necessary... thought oat sounded intriguing but have just not been able to do it!! haha
I got this as a listening question having had a few weeks off Duolingo. I could've sworn it said Jag är nötkött!!! Didn't think that made much sense!!!! hehe (I was in a loud room with the volume not as high as it could've been...)
in the previous sentence, 'mot' was 'toward'; now it means 'against'. I'm confused.
Have a look at Arnauti's comments above, he's explained it in this thread. :)
I thought 'mot' meant toward. That's what the question before last said. I can't see how it can mean toward and against.
You can take consolation in the fact that this makes absolutely no sense to most natives either. We just accept it as "that's the way it is". That said, please have a look at Arnauti's comments in this thread.
It should say "jag är emot kött" not "jag är mot kött" you never say that as a Swedish native speaker.
They're equally fine and equally accepted. Please refer to Zmrzlina's above comments on that.
Yeeeaaah, the Swedish lessons are very heavily skewed vegetarian. I'm kind of getting tired of it.
Vegetarianism is big in Sweden, and we try to include glimpses of Swedish culture in the course.
I always thought it was ominous how "björnen tycker om vegetarianen", on the other hand.
I love how people get offended by the course containing things like "Gud är god" and "Jag är mot kött", it's pretty amusing.
It's a course, it doesn't have opinions and you can't argue or have a debate with it. Its purpose is to teach grammar, words, expressions, concepts etc.
"Jag", "är", "mot" and "kött" are words, last I checked. I wonder if the vegetarians would all be upset if the sentence was "Jag är mot grönsaker". I somehow doubt that.
It's not like the course is trying to convert us all to Christianity and vegetarianism. I don't see any dog/cat lovers complaining because this course seems to prefer turtles!
>It's not like the course is trying to convert us all to... vegetarianism
Well, I would doubt it, as I feel this course implies that: Björnen tycker om äter vegetarianer till frukost, lunch, och middag.
But Swedish vegetarians are not militant like (for example) American vegetarians. Like I discover my Swedish friends are vegetarian only during mealtime, whereas you will learn which Americans are vegetarian (or especially vegan) when there isn't any food in sight.