- Forum >
- Topic: Swedish >
- "Jag ser inga soldater i dag."
38 Comments
Now I am 1/3 there, into translating, "I came, I saw, I conquered" into Swedish.
that because the REAL sentence would be actually : I came, I saw, I vanquished (as in Vici : vincere in late latin or vaincre in modern french)
The real real sentence is: I did come, I did see, I did vanquish
The conjugation veni is the perfectum of the verb venire meaning it is a completed action in the past that cannot change anymore, translated best as "I did come" unlike the imperfectum of "I came" which would be spelled in latin as veniebam.
"Inga" is probably more common, since it is shorter. But they mean the same.
Is there any sort of conscription service for the military in Sweden, such as there is in Korea or Finland or Israel?
There is, or was and it is being discontinued. A swede told me that only people 40+ have served in it, that's how long ago it was running .
Exactly. "I dag" is recommended nowadays, but since "idag" was the old standard lots of people (including myself) still use that version.
"I morgon" and "imorgon" both work for tomorrow as well.
The English translations differ too, but in reality they mean the same. Zero soldiers :).
1461
Yes, that sentence would mean Jag har inte sett några soldater i dag. Not quite the same thing.
- 1461
There's a problem with spelling variation in the type what you hear challenge. This is something we can't fix for ourselves.
AFAIK that would be "Jag ser inte soldater i dag", and it doesn't sound too idiomatic to me
Can I also say " jag tcyker inget om kaffe" ? It's probably wrong, but not sure when it is inte/inge when it comes to negating a verb?
