Translation:The cookies are baked and the coffee is on the table.
You have to use the plural form, since we are talking about several cookies:
brödet är bakat
kakan är bakad
kakorna/bröden är bakade
Why is the plural bakade and not bakada? According to the introductory notes the ending would be -d/-t/-da. Under which conditions does the plural form change from -da to -de?
The perfect participle is slightly complicated and you can read more about it here http://www.thelocal.se/blogs/theswedishteacher/tag/perfekt-particip/.
The endings depend on the verb conjugation group and "baka" belongs to group 1 (the -ar verbs).
Jag bakar - jag bakade - jag har bakat (I bake - I baked - I have baked)
and, for the participles:
Bullen är bakad - Pepparkakshuset är bakat - Bullarna är bakade (The bun is baked - The gingerbread house is baked - The buns are baked).
I think that was the point, actually. According to the lesson notes on passive participles (https://www.duolingo.com/skill/sv/Passive-Participles), it should end in -da, which it clearly doesn't. I'll message Arnauti about it.
Edit: on second hand, turns out I can't read! :D The lesson notes actually first say something else, which makes them correct. My bad!
Ah right, I get it now, it took me a while, so the plural gets the usual past participle and because baka is an -er verb (unlike bygga in the notes) so that makes it bakade. For singular nouns its either bakat or bakad depending on ett or en nouns, is that right?
Disclaimer: I'm out sick and sleep-deprived - but that sounds about right, Austin. :)
You could use "Kakorna har bakat" (The cookies have baked (on their own)) if you want to bring a bit of laughter to the Swedes aroun you, as it would be a grammatically correct sentence but so absurd that it would never happen... :-) Cookies usually don't bake, do they? :-)
baka is either transitive or requires a prepositional phrase, so it's not actually grammatically correct. But I agree it does sound absurd. :)
This isn't a complaint - more a cry from the heart! As a beginner with a pretty sketchy understanding of the formal terms and concepts used in grammar, I am finding this whole lesson so difficult! I thought participles were pretty baffling, but this has nearly finished me off. I am, of course, deeply appreciative of all the time and effort that various lovely people have put into providing us with a free language education; I guess I just need to watch more YouTube videos :-)
That's very understandable. And I appreciate that you let us know. Could you please clarify what you find the most problematic? I'd love to help.
That's really kind of you! Thank you.
I think it would help some learners if grammatical ideas and concepts were broken down and explained really simply. For example, the notes for the passive lesson don't actually explain what the passive voice is.
After a lot of Googling and watching YouTube videos, I'm getting there, but it's clear that the passive voice is a concept that lots of learners struggle with. I mean, to be truthful, I still don't really get how 'The cake is baked' is a passive sentence blush
Ideally - and this is pie in the sky stuff - it would be great if every sentence had grammar notes.
I agree with you. I've been entertaining the notion of running an unofficial course companion in parallel, so that I can attach notes or concepts to each sentence and skill. However, I have nothing more than plans at the moment. Unfortunately, I am limited to what Duolingo as a platform has to offer.
As for the passive, the basic idea is that something can either be done by someone or to someone. If it's by, then it's active: "I'm eating". If it's to, then it's passive: "I'm being eaten". In the latter case, you're not doing the actual eating, so you're being in the passive.
That goes for the cookies as well - they're not just baking on their own: they're being baked by something else (like an oven, or the heat) or someone else (like a baker). Obviously, the distinction is silly in this case - and we say that the eggs are frying (active) rather than being fried (passive), for instance. But the grammatical implications of whatever is the most idiomatic option can be non-trivial in some languages.
No, that would be "Kakorna har blivit bakade" eller "Kakorna har bakats".
Why one should use "är" here? But not needed in "Byggnaden byggs av min pappa."
Swedish can say either bakades or är bakade, where the former is a classic passive and the latter uses a participle. But in this case, the point of the sentence is that the cookies are in a state of having been baked already, so they're finished, and so you wouldn't use the passive.
- kakorna bakades = the point is the baking
- kakorna är bakade = the point is that they have been baked
Surely the right English word for biscuits is "cooked" not "baked"? I have always said "cooked" - and bis-cuit means twice cooked.
That might be regional - I spent a few minutes looking around, and "cooking" cookies appears to be very rare.
Regarding the etymology, bis coctus means "twice baked", so I guess that depends on how far back one wants to trace the loanword.
Literally, yes. But the term comes from bread which the Romans would bake twice, so in the sense of "biscuit", the correct meaning is "twice baked". Hence my comment about how far back to trace the loanword - after all, if we go past the twice-baked bread, we do get to the "cooked" meaning.