"Jag ringer dig senare."

Translation: I will call you later.

[person222222]

does senare share a common ancestry with sayonara or is that just a gigantic coincidence. I mean, they come from completely different languages from completely different parts of the world, but they feel so similar to me

[Zmrzlina]

Not at all related whatsoever.

[OmarDeSant]

I think they are not related at all, but that's how I memorized this word.

[kiteo]

Senare I’m guessing shares a PIE root with senior.

[pluureng]

Senare is the comparative form of sen, which came from the Old Norse seinn. Sayônara was pronounced as sayou naraba during the 18th century, and could be more different in earlier centuries.

Lastly, I doubt that there was any form of contact between the Vikings and Japan during the Middle Ages XD

[QuintusMarius]

That's what I hear with "senare".

[makmegs]

Would it mean the same thing if yoy saaid "Jag ska ringa dig senare?"?

[Arnauti]

The difference is very small. If you say ska, you express a little more determination or intention: you have decided to call. But the difference is small.
It's probably more common to say just ringer here in Swedish, but both ways are fine. You can also use our other future construction and say Jag kommer att ringa dig, but we haven't taught the future tenses yet at this point.

[deactivated user]

Whats wrong with 'I ring you later', I know it doesn't sound very natural in English, but semantically why isn't it correct?

[Arnauti]

I've added that option as an accepted answer too. Obviously the present tense doesn't sound good here in English (while it's perfectly natural in Swedish) but using ring instead of call or phone doesn't make it any worse.

[ArthurJones2]

Strictly speaking it should be "I SHALL ring you later" - "shall" with the first person singular and plural, "will" with the rest. It is annoying to be marked wrong with "shall" when it is more "correct" than the given "correct translation".

[4oYBIxtO]

I shall ring you later could be translated as Jag skall ringa dig senare

[deactivated user]

So with you saying that present tense is natural in Swedish, does that also mean something like 'Jag får ett arbete' is also natural, compared with 'Jag fick ett arbete'?

[Arnauti]

fick is past tense so I'm not sure why you'd want to compare those two. A sentence like Jag får ett arbete would most likely be interpreted just as present tense/something general since there's no reason to think it should be future. In the sentence above, there's senare which shows it's in the future. Also, får is not something you can really decide for yourself (more so in Swedish than in English: not every English get should be translated into Swedish får). Normally we only use verbs that include a component of intention as the present-for-future, and får does not include any intention.

[Jon235428]

Is this the usual way of forming a future tense sentence in Swedish?

[KiwiDressager]

It is one of the ways. You learn about the other ways a little later in the course. So, you can:
- use ska
- use kommer att
- use a verb in present tense paired with a word that signifies a future time eg Jag reser till kina imorgon. (As the sentence above does.)

[ex0mo]

Is that the correct pronunciation of "senare" ? It sounds like "senArre" with a stressed fast a.