"Vi måste till flygplatsen."

Translation:We have to go to the airport.

December 28, 2014

This discussion is locked.


Why is there no verb?


There is! Måste is a verb.

Swedish can use måste like this to indicate what must happen.

Jag måste hem = I have to go home

And so on.


Oh, ok! So måste means they must do something, so it will make it a verb?


When you måste (must), vill (want to), or ska (in the sense have decided to) get somewhere, and the focus is clearly on your arriving there, you can skip the verb of movement in Sweden.
Jag måste till skolan I have got to get to school.
Jag vill hem I want to go home.
Jag ska på ett möte I am going/am on my way to a meeting.
Think of it this way: you're so focused on getting there that in this speech situation, it doesn't matter at all to you how you're going to get there.

ska in this usage can also mean to be headed somewhere


" you're so focused on getting there that in this speech situation, it doesn't matter at all to you how you're going to get there"

Thanks Arnauti, this has made a few things click in my head. The lack of the equivalent for a general "go" in Swedish ("gå" is most often associated with walking, "åker" with motorised transport, etc.) often left me perplexed as to how I would express my inclination to move - I'd always have to question exactly how I would get there. But of course, in Swedish, that verb is not even necessary!

I presume that this formation pre-dates the more motorised forms of transport, and is therefore not a result of such - a way of simplifying conversation, if you will. But perhaps a more generic "go" was never developed because of the exsitence of this formation?


On a side note: We have this in German, too. Ich muss in die Schule. Ich will auf den Spielplatz. Ich kann nicht heim. And to make matters worse, recently, children will even drop the verbs "essen" (eat) and "kriegen/bekommen" (get): "Papa, kann ich ein Mars?"


If it's urgent that we need to get somewhere (like the airport, in this example), English often omits the movement verb also: "To the Batmobile!"


You deserve a medal for this explanation


Where is "go" in this case? Or, to make another example, what if the English were "I have to write a report," or I have to shred a report"? Certainly "måste" doesn't mean "have to go," "have to write," and "have to shred"--and it seems unlikely there would be three different lexical items for each of these "have to x" constructions.


Does it conjugate in a similar way as any other verb does?


Probably it is like in other european languages. If you are not interessed to talk right and you are in hurry you can say "I must home". But it is not literar. People which want to talk elegant will use "I must go home". And by the way, "must" is not identical with "have to". Similar is not identical.


Would you have any examples of where "must" and "have to" are merely similar rather than identical to prove such a statement?


pedagogically it is not good to start the exercise with a sentence with only the modal (without the main verb), having just been told that modals are used with the infinitive of the main verb


Well this common particularity had to be somewhere. Everyone starts with a different sentece, the order is random, you were unlucky.


Wow, Schwedisch ist also genauso gnadenlos wie Deutsch, wenn es darum geht, Hilfsverben als Vollverben zu missbrauchen... Gehen auch so Sätze wie "Ich kann heute nicht." - "jag kan inte i dag."?


Yeah, I'm gonna stick to the Finno-Swedish "måste gå" thank you very much. This just hurts my wee brain.


What's wrong with 'We have to be at the airport'?


Would "vi måste gå till flygplatsen" or "vi måste åka till flygplatsen" be wrong? And would Swedes use it like that?


hmmm. nu behöver vi åka till flygplatsen. five minutes later: vi måste till flygplatsen!

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