"Please, can you read through my answers?"
Translation:Snälla, kan du läsa igenom mina svar?
55 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
1085
You can often use either of the words no matter the context. But if you only use "igenom" you may sound a bit posh, and if you only use "genom" you may sound a bit careless. So I will explain kind of how to use them to not sound too posh or too careless.
"Genom" is like a preposition, example "Hen gick genom staden" ("They (sing.) walked through the city"). While "igenom" is more like an adverb, example "Hen sjöng dagen igenom" ("They (sing.) sang throughout the day").
Another thing to have in mind though is that "igenom" can actually mean through, like really through. Example, "Jag gick genom dörren" means that you walked through the door, nothing special. But if you say "Jag gick igenom dörren" it sounds like you went through the door like a ghost or you broke the wood while walking through it.
So it's basically just a sense of which word to use in which situation. In the end they mean the same, even though it may sound a bit weird in some situations to use one or the other.
I don't think I've met "hen" before. Is it impersonal, like the German "man"?
- 1085
No, "hen" is personal, it's exactly like "he" and "she" except that it works for all genders.
We also have "man" as an impersonal pronoun in Swedish, but there are more and more people using "en" as impersonal pronoun because "man" is the same word as for a male person which makes some sentences a bit wage (for example "Man som kvinna" can mean both "One is [some adjective which you add in the end in the Swedish phrase] as a woman" or "Either man or woman"). "En" (the pronoun) is the object form of "man" (the pronoun), that's why many people have chosen to change "man" to "en" for subject as well.
Thanks! How complicated it all seems! So you would use "hen" when you didn't know if it referred to a man or a woman?
- 1085
@HaroldWonh: Yes, exactly, it's for when you don't know someone's gender, when someone's gender is ambiguous (for example if they are far away) and when the gender may make the situation ambiguous (for example in law texts).
- 1085
Also, think of all the other pronouns, they are non-gendered (at least not in Swedish and English), for example we only have one word for "I" not depending on if you're a man or woman, and one word for "you" not depending on if the person you talks to is a man or a woman etc. All languages don't have non-gendered pronouns. So, "hen" is like one of the other pronouns we know, just that you use it for people you're talking about instead of for yourself ("I", "jag", non-gendered words) or someone you're talking directly to ("you", "du", non-gendered words).
- 2637
Tack. Knowing that the form svarar existed had me thinking that it was a common gender word, but I was wrong.
If a word exists in both verb and noun form, is the noun usually neuter?
- 1085
No, sorry, it's more complicated than that :/ For example "en grill" (="a grill") is a noun that can become the verb "(att) grilla" (="to grill"/"grilling").
- 2637
Point taken. I was thinking that making a noun neuter would avoid plural/present tense confusion, but there isn't much control of when a noun becomes a verb then the noun already has a gender (although I suppose it could switch genders) where if a verb becomes a noun then a gender will somehow be assigned to it..
For me, the easy way to remember this is because svaret (ett svar) is the definitive form of the noun. Ett anything is usually not plural with ar, at least not as far as I have seen.
I don't see what translation duo offered, but you can't use varsågod like that. It can't be used to ask questions, since it's a "here you go!" or "you're welcome".
duo föreslår "Snälla, kan du läsa igenom mina svar?" . Den här meningen med "genom" är fel enligt duo.
- 3134
Yes, 'genom' is more concrete, like walking through something, in this contruction which is a particle verb - read through - we should use 'läsa igenom'.
- 1085
Yes you can, and it sounds even better and more natural, but then the English sentence would be "Can you read through my answers please".
I put "tack" at the beginning, and it was corrected to "snälla". Does "tack" have to come at the end when it means "please"?
- 1085
Yes, in this sentence "tack" comes at the end, and I can't think of any situation where "tack" would be in the beginning of a similar sentence. When you use "tack" this sentence would literally mean "Can you read through my answers, thanks." So it's more like you're thanking them in advance. While when using "snälla" (which could come either in the beginning or the end of this sentence) it means "please", but it may sound a bit pleading-ish, so I would suggest that you use "tack" instead of "snälla".
I wonder if the version with 'tack' at the end should not be accepted. To me: 'Please, do something' does not differ much in English from 'Do something, please'.
We do accept several versions of the phrase with tack at the end, actually.
OK. I think it was missing 'i' in 'igenom' that made my error (after reading the above posts I see that these are not entirely equivalent). Sorry for the complaint.
No sweat. It's also possible a specific translation that should be accepted isn't. The admin for this particular sentence is a bit muddy, to be honest.
- 1085
"Vänligen" is used more in signs, for example a sign with the text "Vänligen, gå ej på gräset" ("Please do not walk on the grass"), while "snälla" is used more in speech, for example someone can say "Snälla, gå ej på gräset" to you ("Please, don't walk on the grass"). But depending on how you emphasize you can use either of them in text or in speech.
- 3134
Yes we write 'Vänligen' on signs, or in letters or mails. And 'EJ' is the 'inte' in written prohibitions. But we would never say 'ej' - so we would say: "Snälla, gå inte på gräset"
Must we use "snälla" (at the beginning of the sentence) when we adress to someone we know well, and "tack" (at the end of the sentence) when we adress to an unknown person?
- 1085
You can use "snälla" in either the beginning or the end of this sentence, but yes, it's more common to put it in the beginning (it sounds a tiny bit more pleading if you put it in the end). Yes, "snälla" is mostly used with people we know well, but depending on your personality you can say "snälla" even to people you don't know. Yes, "tack" always come in the end in this sentence and similar sentences, and it's more common to be used when addressing someone you don't know, but you can use it with people you know too.
- 2606
One of the options I was given on multiple choice was 'Kan du läsa igenom mina svar, tack?', but it was incorrect. What's wrong with it?
Correct solution in the question: Snälla, kan ni läsa igenom mina svar? Correct solution in the discussion page of the question: Snälla, kan du läsa igenom mina svar?
I've chosen the first one and was given as a mistake!!!
❤❤❤!!!
- 1085
Both should be correct, since the English word "you" is both singular and plural, while the Swedish word "du" is singular (so, literally "thou") and "ni" is plural. Report it if Duolingo doesn't accept either of those sentences.
- 1085
"Svarar" means "answering", it's a verb. "Svar" means "answer" and "answers", it's a noun.
- 1085
It’s not wrong, it’s just another word-order than the English sentence, and I would say that your sentence sounds a little bit more natural than Duolingo’s answer, so you should report it if it doesn’t accept what you wrote.
We had kan ni läsa igenom..., so probably just an accidental oversight. I've added it now. :)
- 1000
Whats wrong with snälla kan du läse genom mina svarar? I see it should be läsa instead of läse, but it's only a typo usually being marked wrong in an accepted answer somewhere else. Is svarar somehow wrong?
Hej. Can you explain why it's 'igenom' and not 'genom' in this example? (Katsube's answer doesn't clarify this in her answer above). Thanks!
That's idiomatically mostly used to talk down to someone, or indignantly.