"Jag kommer att ha ringt henne innan du kommit dit."
Translation:I will have called her before you have arrived there.
33 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
It is there, but I think it's hard to hear the "-e" of "henne" before the "i-" of "innan". To me it sounds a bit like "...ringt hen-innan..."
My best advice is just keep practising. I find listening the hardest aspect of a language, but I can definitely feel progress with Duo, over time :-) Things that once sounded impossible now sound like clear words, especially with longer sentences where I used to just get lost!
I have to say that I am still baffled even after reading all the comments. I wad marked wrong for I will have called her after you arrive there. I get that after you have arrived is the more complete or technically correct translation but dont understand why if you can leave the "have" out of the Swedish before kommit you cannot leave the "have" out of the English translation. I appreciate that arrived must change to arrive , but to me as a native English speaker the two sentences mean the same thing.
I think you swapped "before" to "after" and that's what Duo was marking wrong. "Innan" is "before". As for the tense issue with "arrive" or "have arrived", I agree that the English sentence carries exactly the same meaning either way, but Duo is picky with keeping tenses the same between languages if at all possible. I suspect that Duo's Swedish sentence is the natural way to say it in Swedish, but I can't say for sure.
It isn't really, it's the same as the other sentences in this section. If you consider "Du kommer att ha kommit dit" / "You will have arrived there" I think the future perfect tense is clearer. The second part in the whole sentence is just the "kommit dit" bit of this shorter sentence and the "kommer att ha" bit is implied by the first part.
The English version is a little similar. In "I will have called her before you have arrived there" there's a sort of implied "will" as in "you will have arrived there".
Not sure which bit you mean. "You will have arrived there" is perfectly standard English, as is Duo's English version of the full sentence. It would sound very odd if you put the second "will" into the full sentence, but I'm not sure if it's technically wrong. If you swap the order of the parts it's fine: "You will have arrived there after I have called her". (Although not a close enough translation for Duo to accept, I'm sure).
I was trying to explain that both parts are talking about the future, but some words are missed out because the second part depends on the first part. Sorry if that's not any clearer.
The 'future' bit means talking about something that hasn't happened yet, and the 'perfect' bit means talking about the time after that thing has happened and it's over, so further in the future.
The simple future is something like "She will tell me when she gets the letter".
Future perfect is something like "She will have told me by the end of the week". The 'perfect' bit is "have told", which is formed the same way as the past perfect tense (e.g. "I have told you before!").