1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Älgen äter inte köttet."

"Älgen äter inte köttet."

Translation:The moose does not eat the meat.

January 12, 2015



Every time I hear älgen I think its saying alien(=^.^=)


Is this how a native Swedish speaker would be most likely to phrase this? In English it's more natural to phrase it as "The moose doesn't eat meat." But, I know some languages are very insistant on always using an article with a noun.


It's how we would be most likely to say The moose does not eat the meat.
If we wanted to say The moose doesn't eat meat. (admittedly a sentence one would be much more likely to use) we would say Älgen äter inte kött. Swedish is not like French or Italian that way. There are some cases where we make different choices about what is considered definite or indefinite than you do in English, but they're pretty rare.


Yeah. I wrote "doesn't" and it shows like a mistake, but in so many situations before it didn't matter. 'It's, doesn't, didn't" those are all regular things, and correct things in English... wtf


We have an error report from just very recently that I guess is from you. It says

The moose doesn't not eat the meat

It needs to be "doesn't", not "doesn't not".


It seems to me that the app should accept "the elk don't eat the meat". In English is there some technical difference between "don't" and "doesn't"? I'm hearing it used both ways all the time although I realize there is a first/second-person and third-person distinction between "do" and "does" respectively. Do I just live amongst hicks?


I mean, yes there is a dialectal difference between do and does and some English accents use does all the way, and some use do all they way, but for the course we’re sticking to ’Standard English’ or at least the variety where a distinction is made, and since älgen is singular, we only accept does not.


Don't and doesn't aren't interchangable. If someone says the elk don't drink, they are using bad grammer. You should learned this in school. If your ever not sure, then take the contraction and use its root words. You would never say "the bird do not drink" I chose bird in this case because elk is both plural and singular, and the outcome depends on the difference.


I can see that you have missed my point entirely. Let me help you by setting up the circumstances for the use of such a sentence: I'm the zoo keeper and I hired you to feed my animals. After observing that you placed meat in the cages for the bears, the cougars and the elk, I instruct you (very correctly in English) as follows: "The bears eat meat and the cougars eat meat, but the elk (pl.) do not eat meat." Lundgren8 could see where I was going with this because he pointed out that älgen is singular, which is the point I was missing.


Slight issue that doesn't affect the learning: It says "the elk" in the correction phrase (when you get it wrong) but does not say "the elk" when you hover over "Älgen" (alongside "The moose").


en älg is 'a moose' in American English and 'an elk' in British answer. Both are accepted of course, and any accepted answer can be shown to you as a correction. But we had to remove 'elk' from the hint because that hint was confusing to many of our users. 'elk' in American English refers to a different animal, a wapiti or Cervus canadensis. We don't have it here, but in Swedish it's called en wapitihjort or en vapiti.


Does Duolingo not accept "doesn't." I typed "The moose doesn't eat the meat" and got it wrong.


That's odd - it's definitely accepted. If you were marked wrong for that, you were the victim of a bug.


I would hope a moose wouldn’t eat meat.


Please tell us what the thing means. I like Doubling ××××



I support this app

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