I don't understand the construction of this sentence: I'd say "Hon vet inte själv vem hon är" or "Hon vet inte vem hon är, själv" would have made more sense to me (even if maybe they are wrong).
In English you can say "She doesn't know herself" or "She doesn't know who she is, herself". In this swedish sentence it looks like we are saying "She does not know herself, who she is".
I don't think I've expained it well...
The meaning is 'She herself does not know who she is', maybe we should have had that as a main translation. Both Hon vet inte själv vem hon är and Hon vet inte vem hon är själv (no comma) would be OK in Swedish (the latter one less good, but not wrong). And Hon vet inte vem hon själv är would work too.
Actually, "själv" doesn't have to split up "vet inte". The important thing is that "inte" comes before the verb, since this is a main clause.
Hon vet själv inte vem hon är.
Hon vet inte själv vem hon är.
(Själv vet hon inte vem hon är.)
(Hon vet inte vem hon är själv.)
Yes. It can be a bit problematic with children because we don't really like to refer to living creatures as det, but having självt first and then han as in your version is inconsistent, so people tend to try to rephrase sentences like that instead. But in other expressions, like det säger sig självt literally 'that says itself' meaning 'that is self-evident', we definitely use the ett form.
Спасибо, Arnauti! :)
So, my example "Barnet vet självt inte vem han är" is incorrect because there are both "självt" and "han" related to "barnet" in one sentence, is that right? And in other more simple cases (like in "Barnet tvättar sig självt") we just always use "självt" with ett-words, don't we?