"Hon lämnade honom för en annan man."
Translation:She left him for another man.
22 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Previously on Duolingo
Kvinna: Jag älskar inte dig, utan honom.
Man: Nej, snälla!
Narrator: Hon lämnade honom för en annan man.
The svenska band Rednex has the material for another country song here! :)
Wouldn't "Svensk" be used in this sentence instead of "Svenska"
"Svensk", is nationality. "Svenska", is the language itself.
Right?
No. Svenska is also the adjective svensk in the definite and/or plural. So it'd be "Det svenska bandet Rednex..."
Fiddling with an English/Swedish translator I find the English word "leave" (present tense) seems to have two different forms in Swedish. Lämna means to place something and lämnar means to go somewhere else. However the past tense of leave seems to be the same in both instances so we may say "Jag lämnade bröd på bordet" and also "Jag lämnade kontoret tidigt" How come there are two forms for leave between leaving something (as in placing an object somewhere) and leaving somewhere (as in going somewhere)?
I think lämna is the infinitive and lämna is present. So it's the same word but 2 forms of it
I think you meant lämnar for the present, but otherwise that's right. They're different forms of the same word.
2391
I thought "man" was "husband" and put "She left him for another husband." It didn't like that. Is my answer technically incorrect, or just idiomatically incorrect? Tack!
No. "man" is not "husband". it only gets this meaning when combined with a possessive. e.g. "en man" = "a man", "hennes man" = "her husband". Because to her, her husband is not just any man, its HER man. kinda like "my girl" can mean "my girlfriend".
Thus in the above sentence it would only work, if she left him for some other woman's husband. Than I think it'd be "Hon lämnade honom för en annan kvinnas man. "
I'm not entirely sure I agree with you. I mean, obviously everything you write about usage is correct, and explains very well why it should not be accepted. But Barry's original question was whether it's technically incorrect, which I wouldn't say it is - after all, the word "husband" in isolation is perfectly translatable to man, without the need for an adjective or a possessive.
