"She does not even have shoes on."
Translation:Hon har inte ens skor på sig.
19 Comments
I don't quite understand the word order (Why does the skor move before the på sig?)
Is it also possible to put the sentence in a different order?
With "ha på sig", the worn thing can be put on either side of "på sig" and still make sense.
"Hon har inte ens på sig skor" is also correct.
If you speak German, it helps to imagine the sentence in German and then translate word by word:
Sie hat nicht einmal Schuhe auf sich Hon har inte ens skor på sig
I quite often cannot figure out what the order in Swedish might be, so I try German and it has never failed me so far...
Why "ens", rather than "till och med"? Do they have different meanings?
Till och med implies exceeding expections, whereas in this case it's the other way around.
592
So this one is clear but what about även. I noticed that sometimes it is translated as even (more often as also) and it is tempting to use it due to the similarity with English even. Would it work here?
- 655
Ens was listed in one of the lesson covers a ways back, but never used. In every lesson, each word listed should be used at least once.
- 402
As far as I remember you could get 'ens' after you repeat that lesson couple times.
If I could get a little help with this it would be great! I tried to construct this sentence like so:
She is wearing her shoes -> Hon har på sig hennes skor She is not wearing her shoes -> Hon har på sig inte hennes skor She is not even wearing her shoes -> Hon har på sig inte ens hennes skor
This is not the first time that the construction of this type of sentence has tripped me up. From the answer I can see that I am wrong, but I am struggling to come up with a way of building sentences with adverbs :/. If there is a video or something I could read which explains that would also be helpful
Thanks very much
- 949
Just a short answer, I hope someone else will suggest some further reading, but inte needs to go after the verb, and it comes between the verb and its particle:
Hon har på sig sina skor.
Hon har inte på sig sina skor.
Hon har inte ens på sig skorna.
Does the last example you gave, but with the the word order of the recommended answer, work? Something like, "Hon har inte ens skorna på sig?"
I believa "hennes" would refer to some other female person's shoes, which would feel odd here. When referring to someone's own possessions or qualities, the reflexive sin/a is used (just as it's "på sig" instead of, I think, "på henne").
English doesn't have a reflexive pronoun as a standalone - " own" qualifies it in a possessive, as in "her own shoes", while "-self" does so in pronouns, "on herself". Sometimes it's left implied, though, as " her (own) shoes" would often be unless you specifically wanted to emphasize that they were HER shoes, not somebody else's. In Swedish, though, the distinction between reflexive and not has got me marked wrong a number of times for using the wrong pronoun. (By that token, do not take what I say here as expert advice!)
German has ruined me. Look at this word order: Hon har på sig inte ens skor. (Sie trägt sogar keine schuhe).
- 712
That was the word order I used, too.
If you can say either Hon har skor på sig or Hon har på sig skor to render the positive, then it seems reasonable to expect either Hon har inte ens skor på sig or Hon har på sig inte ens skor to work in the negative; even if you don't know German (or Dutch).
But that's language for you: not terribly logical.
