"Kommer du dit i kväll?"

Translation:Are you coming there tonight?

January 1, 2015

This discussion is locked.


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.


Still a poor English translation.


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.


No native English speaker would ever think to give the "correct" translation. Come here, go there, go here -- but never "come there". A linguist could explain why, but any native speaker can tell you it's wrong.


You could actually say "come there", but maybe we'd better not go into how that might be interpreted by a native speaker of English (which I am) ;-)


I agree with you. However, as you say, this is possible in Swedish.


That's why no one is criticizing the Swedish sentence, only the English "translation".


Good to know that. What's a possible scenario where you would use "coming there" instead of "going there?"


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.


In English, I'd ask, "Are you going to be there tonight?" in order to emphasise arriving rather than going, so I recommend this as an acceptable translation.


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!


No Kommer du att gå dit i kväll? ?


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.


So it depends on if your focus is the start ir the end of the journey?


You simply say ”komma” instead of ”go”. You could say either ”Ska du dit i kväll?” or ”Kommer du dit i kväll?”


Is there the presumption that the questioner will attend with "kommer du dit" but not necessarily with "ska du dit"? The English translation above would make more sense if "with me" or "as well" was added on the end, so I wonder whether this is implied in the Swedish?


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.


Correct English would be: Are you coming here tonight? OR Are you going there? You don's come there.


I feel will you get there tonight? should be accepted. Not completely sure, though.


Ikväll should be accepted.


I know, typos don't bother me but I was actually marked wrong for this. This was in a timed practice, otherwise I would have reported it. I may have missed an error but I'm pretty sure everything else was correct.


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…


Interesting Yeah they should really get on that. :)


What is the difference between dit det and dör ?


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?"


Is there a general rule for using 'dit' instead of 'dar'? Don't both words translate to 'there?'


It is important for a correct english phrase to be supplied because to native english people this is a nonsense phase that we would not use the swedish because


Yall need a native English speaker helping you all with these lessons. There's never been an English speaker that says this phrase or many of the other phrases yall use. Defeats the whole purpose of learning sentence structure if the sentence will never be used.


Are you saying that, speaking Swedish, no one would ever say "Kommer du dit i kväll?"


I'm a native English speaker. I'd be happy to answer any questions concerning English grammar.


I tried "do you come there at night?", which was wrong, but now I'm curious - how would you write "do you come there at night"?


Depending on whether you mean night-night or evening-night: Kommer du dit på natten? or Kommer du dit på kvällen?


Why can i kväll translate to tonight if it more accurately means this evening?


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.


Thank you, this is certainly correct about Swedish and it confirms my impression of how it is used in English.


Ah, okay. I was unaware that in Swedish it refers to everything up to 11. Either way, quite weird that "mitt i natten" means midnight/middle of the night if it's only 1 hour into what's "officially" considered night.


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'.


Can I just clarify? In Swedish is it correct to use kommer with dit? Or should it be går with dit and kommer with hit, as it is in English? If it is, I'm totally ok with that, because after all, Swedish is not English! Thank you :)


Can the correct English translation please be added?


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.


'Do you arrive/get there this evening/night' might be one sense, with the emphasis on 'there.' 'Anländer du dit' would emphasize the arrival itself, not the location.


Kvall is pronounced very strangely here.


So why doesn't, "Are you getting (or going) there tonight?" not work? The former means you will arrive there the latter means leaving at some point. To me they make more sense as an English sentence, of course we're leaning Swedish. ;-) Tack!


I have to be honest, the audio sounded so fast on normal like the person was racing to say that. I know normal people speak at a brisk pace but do the words so casually just slam into each other in Swedish like a verbal traffic jam?


Dit = hit? means hither? Is this right? Why then have dit and hit?


dit = thither hit = hither Of course not often used in modern English if at all, but if they were, we would never say "come thither", because thither indicates going away

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