"The man is eating the chicken, not the rice."

Translation:Mannen äter kycklingen, inte riset.

December 2, 2014

10 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/Meow_Haus

Why when saying 'does not eat..' is it 'ater inte', but 'not the rice' is 'inte riset'?

December 2, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/Zmrzlina

I'm not sure I get your question. Could you elaborate?

December 2, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/Meow_Haus

huh, thought about it some more and might have found the fallacy in my question... does 'inte' come before the noun it is referring to? If so, I was merely confused by the lack of a verb before 'inte riset'..

December 2, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/Zmrzlina

Ah. Yes, it goes before.

December 2, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/Meow_Haus

cool.. thanks!

December 4, 2014

https://www.duolingo.com/RRalys

I remember in one of the previous lessons there was mentioned the "je" as the formal analogue of "inte". Or am I wrong? If those two words are analogues, then why the variant with "Mannen aeter kycklingen, je riset" is incorrect?

September 6, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Arnauti

It's ej that is a more formal alternative to inte. Used mostly on signs and very rarely in the spoken language (only in some set phrases).

Mannen äter kycklingen, ej riset. is an accepted answer (although it does sound odd) but we don't accept versions like aeter instead äter, the machinery is not built that way.

September 6, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/RRalys

Oh, I see. Tack saa mycket!

September 7, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Yzerman1719

I can't spell chicken in Swedish

November 20, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/armisaael

Is it still kyckling if you're talking about the animal?

April 24, 2018
Learn Swedish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.