"The priest takes the motorcycle to church."
Translation:Prästen tar motorcykeln till kyrkan.
You use the definite article in such constructions, "to school" = "till skolan", "to work" = "till jobbet".
Always definite article when you put the word directly after a preposition (such as "till", "på", "under", "före" etc.) :)
Also "Prästen åker motorcykel till kyrkan" is completely correct here. Swedish is my first language.
Yes. However, that means one goes by motorcycle, "ta motorcykeln" could refer to a specific motorcycle as opposed to just describing how one travels.
In English, it sounds like one is referring to a specific motorcycle, so "åka motorcykel" is not a faithful translation.
I think that 'åka' would retain the meaning intended. In English we often use 'take' when talking about transport, that is best translated with 'aka' - 'take the bus', 'take the car', 'take the train'.
That's what I thought too, but maybe in that case a more appropriate English sentence would be "goes by motorcycle"?
I don't know, I think it works better for modes like bus or train because those are modes of public transport and so you usually don't have a specific bus or train you take.
Nice to hear a native saying it, because I thought so too!
You'd assume they are talking about the priest traveling by motorcycle to the church, and not the priest carrying the motorcycle to the church.
Is 'motorcykel' a possible synonym to 'moped'? Or have they any difference? I always use the second one
They are not synonymous. A "moped" is a smaller and slower version and you are allowed to ride one from age 16 and up (if I remember it correctly). You should probably not call a proper "motorcykel" a "moped", since you could offend somebody.
Kastube and rharper: Your conversation confuses me. Is "Prästen tar motorcykeln till kyrkan" supposed to mean that he actually picks up the motorcycle (or uses some other means) and takes it to the church, or does it mean he rides the motorcycle to the church? I assumed it meant he rides it there, but after reading your exchange, I'm not so sure.
It simply means that he takes the motorcycle as in riding it, yes. As when you say "take the bus".
Thanks. Out of curiosity then, would you use the same verb if you wanted to say, "The priest took a gift to the church."?
Yes, "Prästen tog med sig en gåva till kyrkan" or in present "Prästen tar med en gåva till kyrkan". With the slight difference of an "med sig" ("with him/her") after the (conjugated) "ta" to show that they carry/pick something to the church. You can also say just "Prästen tog en gåva till kyrkan" but that's more colloquial/slang.
Tack. And I'd like to take this opportunity to say that I am enjoying learning Swedish with Duolingo.
This is a bit of a broader question about definite nouns: As you know, in English we don't sign a definite noun morphologically like the Swedish do. A literal translation of "till kyrkan." still makes sense to me ("to the church"). However there's times when the Swedish language can express definites in a way I have no concept of. For example: English does not allow me to express the difference between "denna nyckel" ("this key") and "den här nyckeln" ("this the key"). Can anyone clarify the difference between these two, maybe give examples?
Both "denna nyckel" and "den här nyckeln" mean "this key". Also " detta" = "det här" = "this" (in neutrum) and "dessa" = "de här" = "these". The reason why the noun is definite after "den här"/"det här"/"de här" is because "här" is a preposition. Every time a preposition is followed by a noun the noun has to be in definite form in Swedish. So that's why "den här nyckeln" doesn't mean "this the key" but instead just "this key".
You might also have heard "den där"/"det där"/"de där", and I think this is where we should focus when it comes to "denna". Because even though "denna" can be changed to "den här" it can in some contexts also be changed to "den där". "Här" means "here" and "där" means "there". So it's more clear to use "den här" and "den där", because then you can talk about the key your holding ("den här") and the key over there on the table ("den där") without mixing them up. Anyway it's never wrong to use "denna" where you can use "den här" and vice versa, but if you want to be more clear about the objects position you would preferable use "den här". Also it's a bit dialectal, some dialects prefer one or the other, but both are considered correct in written text.
That is the worst explanation I have ever heard. "här" is an adverb, not preposition, and there is no rule that a noun following a preposition has to be definite. "på" is a preposition, and "han sitter på en stol" is a perfectly correct sentence.
Yes, I wrapped my head around it a bit to fast there, I have to think a bit more into it. (Even though I don't really think it's "the worst" explanation you've ever heard, then you might not have heard many explanations in your life.)
Anyway, in "han sitter på en stol" the preposition is not followed by the noun (here "stol"), it's followed by "en". The thing I said about prepositions is true, even though I accidentally called "här" a preposition. Try to put a noun DIRECTLY after a preposition and you will hear that it has to be in definite form. "På hästen", "i salen", "nedanför berget", "uti hagen", "under bordet" etc.
I see a discrepancy between this sentence and the very similar "Hon tar cykeln till jobbet." In the case of the woman going to work, my answer of "She takes a bike to work" is accepted, but "The priest takes a motorcycle to the church" is marked wrong because I used "a" rather than "the". What is the difference between the two sentences? Tack så mycket!