A native English speaker would not say this exact sentence. In English, "come" is associated with "here," while "there" is associated with "go." There is a link in thought with a place towards the subject, or away from them, and both the verb and adverb consistently express this thought. Not so in Swedish, I see.
I think it's really important to have good English in any translations. Swedish isn't available as a direct DL course from all languages (I tried to learn through Spanish as well as English), so many people come to it via English, and not via their first language. For these people, they might improve their English along the way - or they might learn phrases like this which are completely wrong!
As a native English speaker I see a phrase like this and I can almost ignore it as a DL thing. But for anyone who doesn't know English so well it's really not good at all. It could make their English worse, but they think it's fine because it's there in black and white on Duolingo.
I can see there's been a lot of discussion about this, but here's my take: "here" and "there" are relative in English. "Here" is where the speaker is. And in English you can go here or go there, but you can only come here. Towards the speaker is implied in the verb. Of course we can understand this translation, but to a native speaker it is not correct.
In short, "come there" is not possible because "come" implies towards the speaker and "there" implies away from them.
I think it's a difference in focus. We can say both Kommer du dit i kväll? and Går du dit i kväll? (Ska du gå dit i kväll? sounds even better, but that's a different story).
With the kommer version, the focus is on their showing up at the event. With the går version, the focus is on their going there, which incidentally also explains why we prefer to say Ska du gå… rather than Går du …, since the intentionality of that sentence works better with ska.
That would not be wrong, though it would probably be translated more like Are you going to go there tonight? We would prefer to use ska when asking this, because it is usually the other person's intention one would ask about, rather than some kind of 'objective prediction', but it is still a perfectly correct sentence.
I know Arnauti isn't here any more, but I'm also (like many others) curious about how this interesting sentence translates into English concepts. For example, would an acceptable English translation be "Will you be there tonight?" I didn't really understand Arnauti's explanations of the "difference in focus" of the three example sentences he gave as the focus' seemed too close for me to distinguish. Could one of you fine moderators take another stab at this? The idea of 'coming there' and 'going here' has bent my brain in a pretzel!
This is not English and should be changed. It is a failure in the aims of teaching a language if you are not actually using one. The verb "come" has a sense of towards and "go" a sense of away from, hence you cannot "come there."
There have been many occasions in earlier lessons where the English and Swedish sentences have looked completely dissimilar, and rightly so because of the differences between the two languages. So why not give the English translation as "Are you going there tonight" so that people learn the Swedish would use "kommer" with "dit" as well as "hit?"
This both fails to teach anything other than how to say something you would never say, and looks like a sloppy mistake by whoever set the lesson. My initial thought was that someone accidentally made a typo putting a "t" before "here".
But even with learning how to say an illogical sentence, that no one would ever use, in Swedish, that does not teach me that if I wanted to say I was "going there" I would need to use "kommer" rather than say "går."
The exercises are meant to teach, and that includes learning from mistakes. This sentence is failing to do that by giving a false translation.
I came here to say this. 'Kommer' is obviously 'come' but I translated it as 'going there' because that's what a native English speaker would say. Nobody says 'coming there'. The literal translation doesn't work in English and this is taken into account in other exercises so I was expecting it here too.
Sorry, I forgot that that topic doesn't mention the first bug which existed even before the typo bug in translations: in listen-and-type exercises, there is an older bug which prevents the machine from accepting any spelling variation at all. I should edit it. We reported the first one to Duo ages ago and have been reminding them periodically, but…
I think that's because many English speakers use 'tonight' for the part of the day that first gets dark (say beginning about 6 pm), whereas Swedish (and other languages such as German) use the word for 'evening' for the part of the day between 6 pm and 11 pm, and the word for 'night' only later, beginning about 11 pm till dawn the next day. (Please correct me if I'm wrong!)
It's because people used to get up earlier and go to bed earlier in the old days. Just like middag sounds like 'middle of the day' (although the word isn't really used for that anymore) while 12 o'clock is in only really in the middle of the day for people who get up at 4 in the morning and go to bed at 20.
midnatt is still at 0.00 but mitt i natten has a much longer extension, probably more coinciding with 'the time when you expect to be soundly asleep'.
I agree with some of the posts here, that this sounds odd in English, but I don´t think it is impossible. Certainly one could say ´Are you coming tonight?´, when talking about a meeting or event that will be somewhere else. Maybe it implies that we are often there together, so spoken somehow from the perspective of being at that meeting, which is basically what the Swedish does too. So adding ´there´ to make ´Are you coming there tonight´ just fills what is implicitly already there in the shorter sentence. Basically odd, but not impossible in my opinion.
I think the reason "Are you coming there tonight?" sounds odd is because it's not actually filling in what is already implicitly there.
I think the more complete sentence is "Are you coming to the party tonight?" and the abbreviated version is "Are you coming tonight?"
If the more complete sentence was "Are you going to the party tonight?" then the abbreviated version would be "Are you going tonight?"
English just doesn't like to violate the "come here" and "go there" rule.
The English sentence should be corrected anyway because it leaves you wondering whether it is "comming here" or "going there". "Kommer dit" is it "go there" or "come here"? Is it "Are you comming here (dit not här) tonight? 'Eller' Are you going (kommer not går) there tonight?"