"We do not swim after eating."
Translation:Vi svømmer ikke efter mad.
So would "vi svommer ikke efter spiser" be considered wrong? Is it comprehensible?
It would need to be something like" vi svømmer ikke efter vi har spist" (using pressent perfect) we do not swimm after we have eaten
This was my instinct as well, but spiser technically translates to 'eats' which wouldn't make sense in this sentence. Whether the sentiment would be understood in everyday conversation I could not tell you.
I translate the first one as We do not swim after we've eaten, and the second as we do not swim after meals. I'm not clear why Vi svommer ikke efter vi spiser would be incorrect?
... because it is easier to trust urban legends without questioning them.
I even looked on the desktop version, but nowhere is a hint on how and why to use the past tense 'have spist'. Isn't this something you learn in later lessons?
"Vi svømmer ikke lige efter at vi har spist " er det korrekte svar ." we do not swim after eating " er absurd, det skulle have været : "we do not swim just after eating" ellers var der logisk set aldrig nogen der kunne svømme.
could the form "efter mad svømmer vi ikke" also be correct ? just wondering