"I had lunch with my lawyer yesterday."

Translation:Jag åt lunch med min advokat i går.

January 13, 2015

12 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/Chris-Butler

Wouldn't "Jag hade lunch med min advokat i går" be a more accurate translation?

Edit: Out of curiousity, is 'to lunch' a verb? "Jag lunchade med min advokat i går"?

June 4, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Arnauti

I noticed that this very old question hasn't been answered, so I'll give it a shot.

  1. We don't use ha to mean 'eat' like you do in English. For eating, we say äta and for 'have' as in 'Have an apple!' we say ta (Ta ett äpple!).

  2. luncha is a verb: Jag lunchade med min advokat i går is an accepted answer.

Footnote: It is possible to ha anything if you think of it as "a calendar event" and in that sense, you can certainly hear people say ha lunch – still, that's probably a less likely interpretation of this sentence and most importantly, could be misleading, so it's not an accepted answer.

November 6, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Lisa939448

That's what I said. Did you submit it? I checked a few sources, and that's what their translation was, too.

March 10, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/Rekov
  • 1495

If I were to say "Jag åt lunch med advokaten i går," would it also imply that its my lawyer? I know Swedish prefers the definite for possessives, but I am not always sure if it applies in all situations.

April 18, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Arnauti

Also an old question that needs a reply, I can see from reports that many people are thinking about this.

We do use the definite to indicate possession in some cases where English insists on having a possessive pronoun, but only in cases where it's clear from context. The perfect example is Jag borstar tänderna -> 'I'm brushing my teeth'. 1. Whose teeth do you expect me to brush? 2. Not everyone has teeth, but as a general rule, people are expected to have them.
If you're talking about a lawyer, none of those things apply. Why would I necessarily have lunch with my own lawyer? Not that obvious. And a lawyer isn't something everyone is expected to have. So because of this, if we said advokaten here, it would most likely mean 'the (previously mentioned) lawyer'.

November 6, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Haesselmaas

Could this also be Jag fikade med min advokat i går?

January 13, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Volrat

I'm afraid not, fikade corresponds to had coffee. One could however say lunchade instead of åt lunch

January 13, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/stephenbal4

So is lunchade or thing or no?

February 12, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Arnauti

It is.

February 12, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Karen69472

I read that igår = i går and therefore I marked both answers in the multiple choice question --> and was set wrong. Why?

August 21, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Arnauti

Both i går and igår are totally correct. But the way this sentence is coded, the correct answer in multiple choice questions will only have i går. So the option with igår that you were shown must have had some tricky error. It's really hard to spot those sometimes, I'm not a big fan of the multiple choice questions myself.

There's also this bug concerning i dag in the course: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/12941839 – this is not what happened in your case, but could be useful to know.

November 6, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Norravargen

Why "jag tog lunch med min advokat igar" was not accepted answer?

January 14, 2018
Learn Swedish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.