1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Hon antar att vi har fel."

"Hon antar att vi har fel."

Translation:She assumes that we are wrong.

January 7, 2015



Why "har" instead of "är"? She assumes we have wrong???


The guy said up there: "har fel" for people, "är fel" for things.


Can "think" work here in place of "assume", or is antar specifically "suppose" or "assume"?


Yes, anta is specifically ’assume, suppose’ whereas think is either ’tycka, tänka, tro’ depending on context. Read more about which one to use here.


How is 'she is assuming' wrong? Instead it corrects to 'she assumes'.


Isn't to assume one of the stative verbs which can't be dynamic (in the -ing form)? I'm no native speaker, but I had the topic stative and dynamic words some weeks ago.


The things I'm learning about English are almost as interesting as the Swedish. I would say that I generally (or usually? :-}) say "I assume that ...", but I wouldn't think twice if someone said "I am assuming that ..."


I need some English advice: What is the difference between assume, presume and suppose? In German "anta" is nearly the same: annehmen. ta = nehmen


In my experience, they are often used fairly interchangeably; although it isn't correct to do so. In all cases, you are thinking something is the case, the differences are: Assume - without proof Presume - based on probability Suppose - based on evidence or probability but without proof or certain knowledge

They also each have a second completely different definition. I'd never actually thought about the differences before (native English speaker).


There is a real difference but it is mostly ignored now and people generally use assume instead of presume.. Older people, or those who know the English language use them like this : You presume a fact, ie without proof You assume responsibility, control, a disguise


To say we are wrong, it's vi är fel cannot be accepted? To say something is wrong, do I always use have verb?


If somebody is wrong we use 'har', eg. Du har fel. If something is wrong we use 'är', eg. Något är fel.


Oh that clears everything. Thank you!!


Can "guess" work as well?


I think it should be accepted, but assumes and supposes are both closer and better translations.


I think the was she speaks antar is wrong. She says as it sounds like "antade". Could someone check that?


antar sounds good to me. In the slow version, she says vi as if it were written ve, that is an error.


I reckon it's adjusting to the slight rolling of the 'r' before a vowel. We don't have that at all in English so to start with it sounds very hard, even like a 'd' in some cases. But once you're used to it it becomes very natural sounding.


Very true! It takes time to learn to hear a new language correctly.


My biggest challenge with listening is not the speed, it's actually hearing the words. When we do French listening exams it really doesn't help with the poor quality audio and voices that are even considered strange by our French french teacher


But antar as a seperate word sounds like antare, so with an e at the end. Is that how it its supposed to sound?


No, the voice is definitely wrong there.


my first guess was: "She assumes that we have fail ."


I wrote "She supposes that we have fault." and it was marked wrong. Couldn't we use the noun part of speech of "fel", please? If not, then how shall we translate "She supposes that we have fault / mistake." ? And, must we use singular "a fault / a mistake" or plural forms "faults / mistakes" in Swedish and English? Tack tack. :)


English people don't say assume that. We just say assume.

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