"Jag vågar inte berätta för henne att jag älskar henne."
Translation:I do not dare to tell her that I love her.
25 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Perfect love casts out fear - Fullkomlig kärlek driver ut räddhågan.
821
Yes: English sometimes uses the gerund form where other languages use the infinitive, but not in the "[verb] [infinitive]" construction. "They tried to leave," "We're going to do it," "You will have to help me," "I want to believe."
Don't get this confused with the continuous tenses; you can always tell those by the presence of some form of "to be" before that verb ("am walking," "will be cooking," "were running").
Yes, Yerrick is correct; you cannot use the gerund here. However, you could use the base form of the second verb (also called the infinitive without to): I don't dare tell her that I love her. This is probably the most used form, and yes, DL accepts it. It's what I wrote.
Because you can't simply berätta someone. It's like saying "I spoke Antonio". That makes no sense. But "I spoke to Antonio" works.
Wouldn't 'speak' be talar and pratar? Tell is a different verb altogether in english. But I'm assuming the point remains the same; "för" must be used with 'berätta'?
Yeah, I used a different verb to illustrate the same principle in English: English also has verbs that require prepositions. I would normally translate att berätta to to tell, but to tell doesn't require a preposition.
- 215
The closest example structure-wise is probably to explain:
you berätta något like you explain something
you berätta för någon like you explain to someone
you berätta något för någon like you explain something to someone
you berätta för någon att något like you explain to someone that something
Yeah, unfortunately that sounds funky in English. Sometimes in [verb]+ [infinitive] instances like this, the "to" is left out. If I remember right, it's something like: if the negation "not" or" do not" comes before the first verb, then you'll include the "to" in the second verb's infinitive form - example: "I do not want to tell her". If the negation comes between the two verbs, then you leave out the "to" - example: "I want not to tell her". But this second way is really old English, and people don't really speak like that except in Shakespeare plays or poetry.
Yes.
Some grammar aficionados like me occasionally use the archaic construction but normal people do not. I blame the French influence on middle English for replacing beautiful Germanic structure with auxiliary verbs.
The old construction still lingers in some phrases in common usage, such as "waste not, want not" or "he loves me, he loves me not".
I think "dare not" is one of the more common "archaic" sayings used in English, especially in this context. To me, it should be accepted. It's grammatically correct and it is used.
" I do not dare TO tell her.." should also be correct. Isn't it? http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dare?q=dare+
I picked word tiles to say "I dare not tell her I love her" then I saw the extra tiles and, to be sure l redid it to the default answer. Is my shorter version accepted?
