"Det är dess tallrikar."

Translation:They are its plates.

November 30, 2014

This discussion is locked.


Odd translation, odd phrase.


Very - Even looking at each word in turn I ended up with a big "huh!" on my face.


Agreed. The only way it makes sense is if "Det" is translated to 'those' instead of 'it'.


"Those are its plates" is accepted as correct. 'Det' is indeed 'those' just like you want. The plates belong to "it". We don't know what it is, but it has plates. Those are its plates!
(However, it is could also be valid, instead of those are; read other comments for detail). Also, "they are" is technically a more correct translation than "those are" because it doesn't include the extra information about proximity.


mindblown. i dont understand this at all. what is dess?


It could for example be the plates that belong to a restaurant:
"Det är restaurangens tallrikar"
"Det är dess tallrikar"

The phrase sounds slightly odd. "Dess" is normally used in a subordinate clause of a very long sentence, but I guess there are not enough words at this stage to construct something more realistic.


So "dess" is used like in English when we used "its" later on in the sentence or paragraph because we already know the subject we are talking about? Ex. The dog was sleeping by the food bowl. It (food) was "its" (dess/dog's) food.


Ok if we accept this translation so what would be ...detta är dess tallrikar


Yup, that's correct. Either detta or det här.


Wouldn't it be 'dessa' since we are talking about 'tallrikar' (plural)?


No. Unlike "min", etc., the word "dess"does not decline. (That is, it does not change for gender or number.)


Dess means its (not it's!).


Zmrzlina, you don't know how many native English speakers get it vs. it's wrong. It's my pet peeve.


I can imagine so... Many Swedes have a similar problem with differing between pronouns de and dem.


or the whole were/where/we're there/their/they're stuff... it's just really annoying that people always get it wrong (i am not even english)


I remember when I was in grade school (maybe 7 or 8 years old), doing my homework, and complaining out loud, "I can't do spelling!" My big sister happened to be in the room and she said, "Yes you can. What are you trying to spell?" I couldn't remember how to spell "their" - was it "ei" or "ie"?! She said, "It's easy; all three of the 'theres' start with 'the.' " That made it so easy. More importantly, the "voice of authority" of my smarter, older sister announcing that I COULD learn to spell, and then proving it with the little tip about "the," gave me confidence that lasted. She did a really good thing for me that day.

I wonder if people give up on learning the correct spelling (cenTk) or on learning a foreign language (Sandi_e) because they get frustrated and decide it is something they will never be able to achieve.

Come to think of it, without the help of the mods on DuoLingo, I might have quit working on my Swedish. I've been frustrated many times about a particular sentence and getting an explanation and individual help from a mod has kept my enthusiasm going.


One major problem is that spellchecking in Word doesn't always get it right.


When the English are so lazy at learning other languages it is no wonder they can not be bothered to learn their own. I speak as an English person.


That still stands for any nation. I've encountered this problem in all the countries I visited, including my own. To be noted that the errors usually made by natives are not the same as the errors made by foreigners and this can be used to distinguish between them


Why is it "det är" instead of "de är" when there are many plates?


You are right, it would make more sense to say "de är", but that just sounds wrong in Swedish. It's more like "- What is that? -It's plates." "De är" would work if you talk about people though:

"Det är mina vänner" or "De är mina vänner".


Can you elaborate on why it sounds wrong? Do you use "de" only when speaking about people?


There's a longer post about this subject here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/9708920


It might be less confusing if, when you hover over "Det", it gave "those" along with "it - what - the" as the English translation. Otherwise, it seems the correct translation is "It is its plates", which the program accepts as the right answer, which seems grammatically odd in matching "It is" singular with "plates" plural. "Those are its plates" makes sense.


“What part of the stegosaurus are these?” “Those are its plates”

Works for me


Yeah, but you could scroll up a tiny bit and look at my reply from last time you brought up stegosaurus because I don't think it's actually used that way.


I believe "stegosaurus plates" would be "stegosaurus plattor" in Swedish.


I also thought of this phrase as the plates belonging to a restaurant.


This one had me pulling my hair out (have read all below...the only way I can structure this is in reply to a question (shown below but they were NOT the right questions, sorry) Q. what IS it you like best about THIS restaurant...will evince the reply here...of A. It is its plates!... the present tense is kept throughout as the convo is happening NOW and IN the restaurant ....So the statement CAN exist without absurdity...it is the question which is missing which can/will throw English speakers... Thanks all interesting little side topic (first time I have been moved to click the 'more discussion button...lol)


Could it be there is a set of cups in a certain style and these are the plates that go with it? That was the first things that came to my mind when I read it. Still weird though..


That would work. I'm impressed.
If the sentence was going to be revised, I would suggest replacing "tallrikar" with something else....maybe "wings" or "legs" like on an animal. I think we all learned more by this long discussion, though.


Hej Jeanbean i think it is better to change...talrikar ...with... tallrik... or any other single object


I don't understand how det can suddenly mean those. It wasn't an option when I hovered over the word. Is there some sort of reference we can use to see all the possible translations of words like det?


In Swedish, we use det är as a presenting construction for things, and det does not change in gender or number with what is introduced.

In English however, the pronoun changes with what is introduced, so that for plural nouns, you don't want to say it when introducing them:

Det är min bok It's my book
Det är mitt hus It's my house
Det är mina sockar Those are my socks


This is so helpful! Thank you so much for explaining this!


In the given example: "Det är dess tallrikar" the meaning of "dess" is "its". "Dess" has a more widely meaning though. Let me give you an example: "Dess mer du arbeter, dess rikare blir du" can also means "Ju mer du arbetar, desto rikare blir du" (eng: the more you work, the richer you get). The best translation for "dess" would be "the" even though there's no synonym for this word in english. "Dess" is though a word very few are using in real life. I also have to add that my language is norwegian and not swedish.


In Swedish, it’s much more common to use ju…desto or ju…ju than the variations with dess, even though they exist. The primary meaning of dess is still ’its’. It’s a word that’s more common in the written language but still exists in the spoken language and I imagine it’s used more in Swedish than in Norwegian that often uses dets or some garpe-construction instead.


Thanks for the orientation! In nynorsk we have "desse" (bokmål: disse) which means "these".


i have a rather academic question. ju...desto and ju..ju sound familiar, in german there are je...desto/umso/je although the combination je...je sounds wrong to me and according to a well known grammar wise guy it is old fashioned. is it the same with ju...ju in swedish and ju...desto is more common nowadays?


I think that "ju...desto" is the correct one and that "ju...ju" is more colloquial.


Can dess be used with tge pronoun hen, when the gender is not given? Or is this just for inanimate objects?


No, then it's "hens":
hans hund
hennes hund
hens hund


Could they be discussing a stegosaurus?


For that, all I see is several sources using plattor (not tallrikar):
"Han har plattor på ryggen som." Despite the fact that I see that defined only as skiva or disk and these are obviously not disk-shaped plates:
here is taködla link
here is plattor link


Thats helpful, thanks. Are there any analogues to non-food plates where this might be used in Swedish? Maybe for a suit of armor, or something else?


I don't think so. Tallrikar are for cutting on, etymologically. Their shape is not part of the word like it is with plate. Skärbrädor still have a different name though.


Is their a distinction between 'those are', 'that is', and 'it is' in Swedish?


There's already a comment here explaining that is den/det där and those is de där. However, there is also already a comment here explaining that the "det är presenting construction" does not change forms at all.
More here:


"Those are its dishes" should also be accepted.
"Dishes" and "plates" can be synonymous.
"Dishes" can also mean all the stuff you use to eat - plates, knives, forks, spoons, cups, glasses - "Do the dishes" or "Wash the dishes." "Dishes" can also mean a significant food item, such as "Lasagna is a favorite dish of mine."
But "dishes" and "plates" are used interchangeably in many instances.
If someone asks, "Where do you keep your dishes?" they are not talking about forks, knives, or glasses.
(I submitted it, so maybe it will be accepted in the future.)


Strange translation. It does not make any sense


Sigrid, is it the translation into English that you find strange, or is it the original Swedish that you find strange?

In my opinion, the English we are given is a reasonable translation of the Swedish we are given.

As for the original Swedish sentence -- yes, it is unusual, but see the other comments on this page as to whether it is reasonable or not.


It is the English, which sounds strange to me. However - I am not a native speaker. Thanks for your answer.


I am a native English speaker, and it does sound strange. It's not a sentence I can imagine saying, even in the situations that people have brought up on this thread. I wonder if it sounds strange in Swedish, too.


If the original Swedish is strange, and the translation is a good/valid one, then the English too will sound strange.

In other words, one has to distinguish between (1) the source language, (2) the target language, (3) the translation.

If the sentence in the target language is odd, it may be because the translation is bad, or because the original source language sentence is odd.

In the case here, I don't think anyone (except maybe Sigrid?) is saying that the translation here is a bad one.


Sorry, I did not want to raise such a great discussion. I don´t know if the Swedish sentence is strange. I´m just learning, and I have to say: I am doing that with great joy. The English translation sounds strange to me. Maybe it would be easier for me, if Duolingo would have a Swedish-German-Course.


Sigrid, no need to apologize. The discussion is all part of the fun of using DuoLingo.

I agree with you, the Swedish course here is very well done.


In this sentence, the noun to which we are referring is plural, "tallrikar". Would the word "dess" change if referring to a singular noun?


No. It is indeclinable (like "hennes").


I am concerned as to who 'it' is


Can't really be a "who" since it says "it", can it?


Not odd to Germans at all. :-)

In German, this translates to: "Es sind dessen Teller", which is virtually the same sentence as in Swedish.

"es sind" (which would correspond to "it are" in English, which is impossible and weird) is completely common in German, though "es" (English: it, Swedish: det) is a singular pronoun.

"es sind meine Bücher" ("det är mina böcker") etc.


So it doesn't accept "their", but it accepts "its".


Yes. its is for inanimate things, as is dess.
You would say "The study talked about pollution and its effects on global warming". Pollution is not a person. For the same reason, you would use dess to translate my example. Both English and Swedish use different pronouns for inanimate things than for males/females.


I think it's a question of singular vs. plural rather than animate vs. inanimate. English does use 'their' for inanimate in the plural: e.g., 'pollution and industrialization and their effects ...'

its = dess
their = deras

That is why "their" is not accepted in the Duolingo sentence being discussed here, I believe.


Thanks for improving my answer. I might have been barking up the wrong tree.
I think there's a good case for sometimes translating between dess and their. In English, it's so common to refer to certain inanimate entities with they and their. We can personalize it, if the entity consists of people. For example, "Microsoft put out its newest release." and "Microsoft put out their newest release." would both be common. This might be what led to the question we are responding to about this exercise. In our exercise, we don't know the context and I would generally want to say dess should only be its but, if we knew it referred to a library run by people, we might want to allow translating to their.


Microsoft is one company, therefore you would use "its." It has nothing to do with personalizing it, it is simply dealing with plural and singular nouns. If it is one library, use "its"; if you're talking about multiple libraries, use "their."


I would never say, "Those are it's plates" but rather, "Those are their plates."

Like if someone asks me what google does I would never say, "It does search, mobile operating systems, etc." but instead, "They do search, mobile operating systems, etc."


Some speakers do that, but you can't always use their. Do you call a light-pole "they"? No, you do not. Most inanimate objects are treated as such. We use different pronouns with inanimate objects. The exercise asks you to translate the pronoun dess and we don't know what dess is referring to. We do know it's not plural like your reference to Google (that would use deras). We also know it is not referring to a male or female (that would use hans or hennes). It's singular inanimate, like a tree, and should probably be translated as such.
Q: "What are those things hanging on the tree?" A: "Those are its plates".
Also, there's a typo in your question. That its shouldn't have an apostrophe.


But the example used is one where "their" would be used in English.

I understand what you are saying, but the example sentences do not communicate the concept it's trying to teach in English. It is constructed in an unnatural way for English speakers.

As for your example question, "What are those things hanging on the tree?". An English speaker would reply, "Those are plates" or simply, "Plates".


The exercise does not specify. You don't know if the context could allow you to use "their". Even if it did, you don't have to. Not everyone refers to an inanimate restaurant as if it was people. The restaurant has a roof. That is its roof. The restaurant has received all new plates. Its plates are new. What are all the boxes out back? Those are its old plates. So, when translating dess, "its" can work in any context, but "their" is only possible in some contexts.
If you can't do silly, or your imagination fails to think of a scenario where we could indicate inanimate possession of plates or one that uses a genitive when referring to a tree, then read the example I gave earlier using "pollution". Pollution is an abstract inanimate thing, but it is able to possess without referring to it as people. In that comment you will see what dess is for and why we translate it to its.
If a Swedish speaker wants to treat an inanimate restaurant as people, as you do, they could instead use deras which does translate to their. "Jag kommer att gå till restaurangen och slå sönder deras tallrikar!".


I guess my point is that in English it is uncommon for a person to talk about a restaurant in its inanimate form. It sounds unnatural and is not helping to convey the concept you think it does.

Thank you for the extra examples though. I do understand better now. I just disagree with the sentence in the program.


"Their" is plural. Restaurant is singular. If you were talking about multiple restaurants, it would be "their."


I just wanna ask

The hell kind of sentence is that?


if the plates belongs to "it"... wouldn't "it's it's plates" be correct? idk... my english is quite horrid. not sure i remember i've ever put the word "its" to use. oh well! just a thought~


In English, it's is only used as a contraction of it is, but the possessive pronoun for it is spelled its.


Sorry, if I missed it and it was discussed previously, but why is "That are its plates" wrong and "That is its plates" right in this exercise?


You can't use singular that with plural are, in English. Try: "It is", or "They are". If you want to include extra information about proximity which is not in this exercise you would use "That is" or "Those are".


What does that even mean?


"Those are its plates"? What the heck?!


Yeah, using the word "plates" was not a really good decision, according to many of us. I appreciate learning the concept that was intended to be taught with this sentence, the possessive of "it" in Swedish. Substituting a different noun for "plates" would fix it. There is nothing to be done right now, but in future this sentence will evidently be changed or deleted. Oh well, we all make mistakes, right?


I'm picturing someone talking about dinnerware. "Those are the glasses that go with the set." "Where are the plates?" "Those are the plates" would be a more common American response than "Those are its plates" meaning those are the plates belonging to the set.


When to use "det", and when to use "den"? Do you use "det" always at the beginning of sentence?


You see "det" at the beginning of a sentence much more often than "den".

"Den" is used at the beginning of a sentence to refer to a previously mentioned singular non-neuter noun that does not refer to a person. For example:
Jag har en bok. Den star i bokhyllan.

Similarly, "det" is used at the beginning of a sentence to refer to a previously mentioned singular neuter noun that does not refer to a person. For example:
Jag har ett hus. Det är stort.

However, "det" also has many other functions in Swedish. Among these is to serve as a placeholder or formal subject. For example:
Det är dumt att försöka = It is stupid to try
Det har hänt en olycka = There has been an accident

Note that this "placeholder" function, using "it", also occurs in English. Instead of saying "To try is stupid", we usually say "It is stupid to try".


Syftning av dess på flera personer (i betydelsen ’deras’, t.ex. barnen och dess föräldrar) är inte lämplig. Sannolikt beror det här felet på att kopplingen mellan dess och den inte är glasklar.


Not quite sure what you're getting at - dess is only ever a singular pronoun, so it doesn't relate to a plural.


I didn't know det meant those. When i tap on it it doesnt show "those"


In English, the demonstrative pronoun at the beginning of the sentence must match the verb and noun in the predicate of the sentence:
1. That is my dog
2. Those are my dogs

In Swedish, "det är" would be used to translate both of the sentences above. The only difference would be the grammatical number of the noun in the predicate (hund v. hundar).


Thanks for the explanation. I understand that I shouldn't rely on duolingo when I comes to grammar.


Strange sentence. You'd never say that, unless its a thing or place that'd own the plates


That's exactly right. The DL sentence here is describing a thing or place that owns the plates.


Stupid translation.


There is no sound!!!


I'm thinking of a raccoon living underneath the foundations of a house and stealing various objects, including plates. There is no other context in which this sentence would work.


There are many other contexts in which this sentence would work, and many of them are spelled out on this page.

Still, I like your idea about the raccoon.


Those are it's plates ?


Almost. It must be written as: Those are its plates.

It is incorrect to write "it's" here. The spelling "it's" is used only when "it is" is meant. Fot the possessive (genitive) of "it", the spelling is "its", without the apostrophe.


Vad är det för mening. Jag som svensk förstår inte ens den. Så pratade man kanske förr men inte idag. What kind of sentence is that? I who am swedish don't understand it. Perhap people talked like that many years ago but not today


What is so weird about this sentence? If those are the plates of anything that is an -et word (some institution, building etc.), one would use such a sentence, right?


You are quite right. For some reason, however, this sentence is beyond the reach of many Duo users.


Yes weird sentence. Its plates?


Given the volume of comments on this sentence and whilst I understand the desire to test sentence construction, isn`t it time to accept that this one should go in the bin.


I highly doubt we'll keep it for the next tree version, but unfortunately deleting sentences from a current one is buggy and can cause worse side effects.


my pronunciation sounds fine to me and all it gets it det and the rest is red


I would suggest turning the voice recognition off. It's not very reliable for Swedish, unfortunately.


I usually have to do this one multiple times before it recognizes my pronunciation, whereas I usually don't have problems with most other sentences. Something is very wrong with this one


Why Dishes is wrong?


tallrikar = plates

In English there is a difference between "plates" and "dishes". All plates are dishes, but not all dishes are plates. Besides plates, English "dishes" includes bowls, saucers, cups, crockery, etc.


The sound quality is not the best!! I had problems to hear "dess". I thought it would be "deras"


My microphone is not picking me up


I am imagining a large weird creature with odd carapaces and then some people want to have these carapaces to... eat food from them? I dunno.


Greg, for "plates" in the sense you are imagining, Swedish does not use "tallrikar".

  • 1013

I have always problem to pronounce "dess tallrikar" and have to skip the sentence after x wrong answers :-(


The speaker is unclear.


How would you say, "These are its plates," using these instead of those?


For the demonstrative pronouns "this" or "these" used as the first word in a sentence, I would say:
Det här är dess tallrikar.

For "that/those", I would use either "det där" or just "det".


Sounds strange in English!


In what sort of reality would such a sentence occur?


Read the comments on this page. There are numerous examples of how such a sentence might be used.

You didn't post your comment before reading the page, right?


The programme will not accept my attempts, but will not move on after three attempts


Very strange sentence as an English speaker


Det meaning those? How come! Very confusing sentence.


You cannot translate from one language to another 1:1!


When beginning a sentence with a demonstrative pronoun (this/these or that/those), or the personal pronoun it/they, English requires changing the number of the pronoun to agree with the complement later in the sentence. Thus, for example:
1. This is my dog.
2. These are my dogs.
3. That is my dog.
4. Those are my dogs.
5. It is my dog.
6. They are my dogs.

In contrast, Swedish (and also Dutch and German, among other languages) do NOT change the introductory pronoun for number. Really, English is the odd man out here.


What about "hens"? How to distinguish what to put? Hens or dess? I don't have this in my language so it's very strange. Also it would help if we know at least whose plates really are in the first place (a cupboard or a living being?)


Hi Petra. My suggestions:
1. Forget about "hens". The standard third person possessive pronouns are "his (hans)", "her (hennes)", and "its (dess)". In Swedish.
2. Because the Swedish uses "dess = its", we know that the reference is to a non-living (or at least non human) thing.


odd phrase indeed, and tallrikar could always be translated as 'dishes or 'plates' now it cannot


Det is "it," not "they." De is "they." So why is "det ar tallrikar" translated as "They are its plates?"


Because you cannot translate words and sentences 1:1 between languages. - For instance, many English native speakers say things like "here is the keys" instead of "here are the keys", something that, for example, a German would never express this way (using singular "is" for a plural noun "keys")!


Terry, Swedish uses just the one construction, "det är" for both singular and plural, whereas English uses two different constructions -- namely, "it is" for singular and "they are" for plural. So, for example:
1. It is a plate -> Det är en tallrik
2. They are plates -> Det är tallrikar


So I assume "det" means "it" singular but also "they" plural if it's referring to objects, not people?


It can refer to objects, but also to people, in singular and in plural.


What's the difference between those and these? I'm kind of confused.. in both English and Swedish :( I thought I knew my English grammar :( Do you always refer to near objects by using these (here)?


'These' is the plural form of 'this', and 'those' is the plural form of 'that'.

In Swedish, 'this' is 'den här' or 'det här' and 'these' is 'de här'. 'That' is den där' or 'det där' and 'those' is 'de där'.

There is also a literary form 'denna/detta' for this/that and 'dessa' for 'these/those'. (Following this literary form, the indefinite, not the definite, form of the noun is used.)

Finally, 'den/det' and 'de' can sometimes be used to mean 'that' instead of 'the'.


Some dictionaries claim that detta corresponds to both this and that, maybe because it's mainly used in the kind of context where either works in English, because that's what very abstract contexts tend to be like. In this course however, detta/denna/dessa are only allowed to be this and these. This corresponds better to how detta is used in the parts of the country where detta is used in informal speech.


these/this are used to refer to objects in close proximity - able to be touched. Those/that are used to refer to things out of reach.


Har aldrig hört en sådan meni g i Sverige på 70 år!


This is a terrible sentence. There are a few like this. It is akward and not commonly used.


Sounds perfectly normal to me, and we should learn what is used and not what a foreigner thinks is impossible to say (considering his own background).


No make sence ! It is their plates ....i think


Yes, you got it right. How were you able to do that? Because the Swedish sentence does in fact make sense. See the other comments on this page for more.


This phrase 'it is its plates' does not make sense. This is not proper English, it means nothing!


Q: "What is that package in the kitchen" A: "it is its plates". This could mean the plates that belong to the kitchen are the package. They're bundled to make a package. Or Q: " What is the cause of all that noise in the kitchen?" A: "It is its plates". The cause of the kitchen noise is the plates that belong to that kitchen; collectively, they are the cause. Those plates are its worst aspect. Its plates are a nuisance. However, the version of this exercise that I actually received is multiple choice and the answer is "Those are its plates" which is easier to imagine used than "it is its plates", even if both versions are possible translations.


this is stupid,i can say "dess tallrikar"with whatever accent i want, both words are NEVER accepted, no matter in what sentence


devalanteriel is so patient with us! He seems to be really good with people. Always helpful.


That really sounds incredibly frustrating. Unfortunately, I have no good advice to give other than to turn the microphone off for the lesson. We have zero say over the voice recognition software.


Next time try, TAWL RICK' AR. Pronounce tawl like "towel" in English and stress the second syllable of "tallrikar." It finally worked for me after dozens of attempts trying many other things.


It's confusing because it's not a real sentence anyone would ever use.


Not correct Swedish nor English


Of course, it is correct! It has been explained countless times that "its" can refer to a building, an institution etc. Maybe to a kitchen... - Otherwise, when would you ever use "its", if not here?

This is just a random search result (via google): https://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/montreal-375-buildings/ "Montreal is 375 years old, but how old are its buildings?"

Do you notice: "its buildings"? If you can say "its buildings", you can just as well say "its plates". For instance, if a city were famous because of its very special plates.

Some people need more imagination - of course, there are scenarios where "its plates" makes sense and can be used:

For example think about a TV report:

"And now for today's topic: A kitchen and its secrets - its plates, its cups, its knives... :-)


This is wrong. What does it mean (its)? Never inEnglish com like this? The plates belong to who?! But their plates belong to them.


its is one of the top 100 most used English words in the entire language which means "belonging to it". An example might be: "The vine grows at its own pace, casting its own shadow, and after its roots are strong, we harvest its fruit."


Incorrect english


The English is a correct translation of the Swedish we are given.


It is definitely not incorrect English.


Yes, it is incorrect English.

For one thing, "It is" doesn't go with "plates." Singular and plural have to match in English. You'd have to say, "They are its plates" or "It is its plate."

I think this is a case of Swedish preferring to start a sentence with, "It is...," regardless of whether the words following it will be singular or plural. It's kind of a set phrase in Swedish.


Jeanbean, the official DL translation at the top of this page is "Those are its plates", not "It is its plates". I agree with you that the latter is incorrect English, but the former uses the plural word "those", and so the English sentence is quite correct.

As for the Swedish, my point of view is not that "Det är" always means "It is" and that therefore sometimes Swedish uses "It is" when referring to plural entities. Rather, my view is that Swedish "Det är" sometimes means "it is" and sometimes "they are". In other words, in this topical use, "Det" can be either singular or plural.


Looking at all of the comments, with which I agree, why hasn`t someone revised this question so that it conforms with normal speach?


It's already been revised at least once, which might have made half of the comments a bit obsolete. However, it was actually fine before the revision and it's still fine after the revision. The speech (not speach) in these exercises mostly only seems abnormal to people because of the lack of context. We rely on context more than we think. Nobody would have batted an eye if they heard these phrases in conversation on the street. So, the only way to make the exercises more "normal" would be to redo the course to give paragraphs (and pictures) rather than just short phrases with no context. and seriously, what else could you possibly do to this exercise to make it better? They would have done it already if there was something. I think they gave up on developing new skill trees but the volunteers would have left this one out of the new one to spare themselves the complaints and maybe just not taught people dess at all. By the way, there are no paid Swedish course developers and I don't think it's productive to beat this dead horse any further after it's been covered so thoroughly on this page.


I think it's good that the sentence confused people. That sparked a lot of good discussion where quite a few of us were able to learn something more about the Swedish language. It's not a criticism of the DuoLingo developers. It's a frustration with not being able to understand and wanting to know for sure what is accurate.

Sometimes it's hard to know whether to overlook the awkward sentence as "it just doesn't translate easily to English," or report it as incorrect because the English translation really doesn't make sense at all or is grammatically incorrect.

But the discussion is good and doesn't necessarily mean the item needs to be changed by DuoLingo or completely explained by a developer.

I say, talk on, people. This is how we learn.


A simple change of the word "tallrikar" would do the trick.

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