1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Vi läser inte brevet."

"Vi läser inte brevet."

Translation:We are not reading the letter.

December 27, 2014

19 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/sebastianc381917

So why is it we do not read the letter instead of we did not read ... ?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

The Swedish sentence is in the present tense: läser = reads. But we did not read is past tense, in Swedish that would be vi läste inte.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/makiky

tack sa mycket! I made the same mistake and realised it just now!


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Johan.Stavros

I hear "de" instead of "vi"...


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

You're right, the vi sounds very blurry here. I've disabled the 'listen and type' exercise for this sentence now.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Timislove

"We do not read the letter" sounds very strange in english. We did not read the letter would sound more natural. Because it's definitive, it sounds as for example, if you received a letter after someones death. We do not read THE letter (EVER) makes sense, but it wouldn't be a very commonly used sentence. We did not read the letter however, sounds less important. We didn't read it, but would/could later.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

I'll try changing the main English translation to We are not reading the letter, hopefully that will make things clearer.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/RemcoMertens

It's saying 'lettre' is a typo.

No it's not.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

Unfortunately Duo has some automatic typo handling for English that we cannot change.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JoseeV64

Lettre is French


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JonLintern

The Vi/de is not clear at the start of this phrase


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/alan26964

As a general comment, you have a few translations into english which although not wrong do not sit right on the ear. I am reminded of a Churchill quote, "Up with which I will not put." Which he explained, while perfectly correct grammatically no englishman would ever express in this way.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rick930214

Help! In this definite form, when should we adding en or an or et to present' The+n, is there any regular pattern to use?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/arzay111

Why it isnt "we dont read the letter"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

That's also an accepted answer. The Swedish sentence translates both.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/SabrinaS.5

I thought I was We are reading not the letter haha :)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/kevkrre

Out of curiosity, in English, this sentence ("we are not reading the letter") would be interpreted generally as "we are not going to read the letter" (i.e. it will never happen) rather than "we are not currently reading the letter" (i.e. it isn't happening at the moment).

Is this true in Swedish as well or no?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Arnauti

läser covers both. In general, the Swedish present covers both the English present and present continuous, and in some cases can be used when you'd prefer a futural construction in English.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Athalwulfaz

Cognates in English: "We lease not the brief."

Learn Swedish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.