The English translation can have two meanings - either that the subject of the teaching course is Swedish, or that the course itself is presented in Swedish. Which is meant here with the Swedish på? If it's only one of the two meanings, how would you express the other meaning?
Funny, because in English I would say "the instruction is in Swedish" to mean that the course is taught in Swedish and "the instruction is on Swedish" to mean that the course is about the Swedish language :) Also I would never use "The teaching" in this manner.... "the teachings of the bible/Koran" or "she wants to go into teaching" but I'd never say "the teaching is in swedish", it just sounds weird. Unless this is an example of usage in American that isn't really used in English.
> So if it was 'i' instead of 'på' the lesson would be conducted in swedish rather than about swedish?
> A literal translation of this sentence would be that the teaching is "on Swedish", meaning that the course itself is taught in Swedish. To say that the course is about the Swedish language you would have to change the preposition and say "Undervisningen är i svenska"
Which is right?
FWIW, I was blazing through these lessons. (Native English speaker, but fluent in German, so easy.) But this one stopped me cold. The intent is that the subject of the teaching is Swedish, but the English translation demanded—the teaching is in Swedish—unambiguously means the the language of instruction is Swedish.
The problem is that there is no one-to-one glossing into English that works. All the English phrases are weird.
The teaching is on Swedish (yuck)
The teaching is about Swedish (meh, and suggests learned about the language, not learning the language. Swedish has 10.5M speakers primarily in Sweden and Finland, etc.)
It is Swedish instruction. (Right meaning but wrong grammatical focus.)
The instructional content is Swedish. (rather formal)
It's hopeless. English speakers use a different approach depending on context.