"The man's sister wants golden dresses."
Translation:Mannens syster vill ha gyllene klänningar.
Chicken is sometimes a false friend in Swedish. Your sentence is one case of that, because en kyckling can never lay eggs. That would be en höna, ’a hen’. It seems we draw the line between chicken and hen somewhat differently.
When it's seen as food, there's rarely a problem, but this is probably mainly because people rarely eat höna these days. Chicken soup can be either kycklingsoppa or hönssoppa though.
Ah, thanks. I'm still a little confused, though, I guess, because English doesn't really draw a "line" between chickens and hens, any more than English draws a "line" between "human" and "woman." Hens are (adult) female chickens, roosters are (adult) male chickens. But all of them (males and female adults, pullets, cockerels, and chicks) are chickens. So if hens aren't "kyckling" and "roosters" aren't "kyckling" - does "kyckling" apply only to the young ones? Or are some adults also kyckling - and if so, which?
Why is "ha" required here? I entered "Mannens syster vill gyllene klänningar." and it's wrong as it has to be "vill ha". Can you not just say "wants" (vill) in Swedish like you can in English implying that you want to have?
Even in German, I'd say "Meine Schwester will goldene Kleider", for example, without "haben" and unless I specify some other actions (she wants to sell them or ... burn them), it will refer to ownership and nothing else.