"You do not take your responsibility for the children."

Translation:Ni tar inte ert ansvar för barnen.

December 30, 2014

This discussion is locked.


This sentence is odd in English. We don't put these three words together - "take your responsibility." We use "take responsibility" and we use "your responsibility," but not all 3 words together.

We would say one of the following:

You do not take responsibility for the children.
You are not taking responsibility for the children.
You do not take responsibility for your children.
You are not taking responsibility for your children.

Taking care of the children is your responsibility.
Unloading the dishwasher is your responsibility, not mine.


Agreed. And also in this particular instance I think we'd be very likely to use present continuous even if it's a more long term habitual thing. "You aren't taking responsibility for the children."


I agree and was annoyed by this. However, I grudgingly appreciate the fact that getting the awkward translation into english wrong multiple times will help me remember how to say "ta ert ansvar" if i want ever want to say it in Swedish...


Also "take on responsibility" could work, even with "your". I could see a different verb making more sense in English if we want to keep "your" though, like "accept your responsibility"


Why does 'du' not work in this case?


It does, but you have to choose one: Du tar inte ditt ansvar or Ni tar inte ert ansvar, you can't mix them.


Thank you! (Knocks on Head)


Thanks for explaining, but what is the reason for this?


"you" and "your" needs to refer to the same person. If you mix the singular du/dig with the plural ni/er, it no longer does.


Thanks again!


This sentence would never be written in English this way - the meaning is unclear. Is it “You are acting irresponsibly towards the children?” Is it, “You are not living up to your responsibilities for the children?” Is it, “You are not taking responsibility for the welfare of the children?” Or...?


Can't I say 'du tar inte ansvaret för barnen'?


I am wondering whether a version based on the use of definite form "ansvaret" is possible and whether it would mean a slight shift in meaning. "'Du tar inte ansvaret för barnen" - analogically to a sentence like "Har du tappat minnet?" where the definitive form "minnet" means YOUR memory. Cheers, Ania


Why 'ditt ansvar' instead of ansvaret?


To follow up (as others have already asked), can someone explain what this sentence means? I really have no idea.


Note from a Swede:

"Ni tar inte ert ansvar för barnen", implies that the responsibility is a shared one, and belongs to several people (some of whom, according to this sentence, are not doing enough) while the definitive "ansvaret" would imply that the responsibility is all in one piece, and can therefore all fall to one person at a time.

If this person has "ansvaret", then the implication is that no one else does. If this person has "sitt ansvar", it instead implies they have their area and portion of responsibility, and other people have theirs. A supervisor may have "the responsibility", while a member of a team has "their responsibility".


Why isn't "era" instead?


Ansvar is a singular ett-word, so it has to be "ert".


Du tar inte din ansvar... Wrong?

  • 1825

Would "åt barnen" work? Cause I thought "åt" implies "instead of".


"i stället av" means instead of, "åt" means something like "directly to" or "towards". Very similar to "till" or English "to".

An example: "Han kastade den åt mig" - "He threw it towards me"


Can you remove the reflexive pronoun in this case and if so how does it affect the meaning of the sentence?


Can you explain a bit further? There is no reflexive pronoun in the sentence.


Ohhh duhh it's DITT ansvar rather than din.....


Why is only plural you acceptable.

"du tar inte din ansvar för barnen" should be accepted

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