"The man wants cream in his coffee."
Translation:Mannen vill ha grädde i kaffet.
I'm curious what is wrong or sounds strange about the second option "Mannen vill ha grädde för hans kaffe." Is it just the preposition, so that "Mannen vill ha grädde i hans kaffe." would be ok?
edit: It's the possessive pronoun that's wrong, right? I think it would be ok with "Mannen vill ha grädde för sitt kaffe."
Ok, thanks. So is "Mannen vill ha grädde i hans kaffe." ok? Or would that mean he wants cream in someone else's coffee?
Does the preposition 'till' also work here, giving the exact same meaning? "Mannen vill ha grädde till kaffet."
No, that means he wants cream, but not actually in the coffee. Till in this sense expresses something that goes together with the coffee, but isn't a part of it.
Example: ta en kaka till kaffet = Have a cookie to go with the coffee.
This applies to all kinds of food, for expressing separate parts of what's eaten. You could say "vi äter potatis och ärtor till biffen" to express that you're having potatoes and peas with the steak.
What's the difference between "kräm" and "grädde"? Does grädde apply for foods only?
Why not "sin" ? Doesn't it mean an another one's coffee when we use "hans"?
Yes, hans kaffe means it's someone else's coffee. The suggested translation is just kaffet though, since in Swedish, we often prefer to use just the definite form when it's clear from context whose object we're talking about. But you could also say sitt kaffe, it's just a little less idiomatic, but not at all wrong.
I learned that it's "en kaffe" when it's implied that it's a cup of coffee, which I think it is here, so why is that not a correct option?