"This year is the year of the dog."
Translation:I år är det hundens år.
It is like saying "This year, it is the year of the dog." It's phrased slightly differently than the English way. In English, we make "year" the subject instead of "it." Det comes after är because there is an adverb at the beginning of the sentence and the verb must stay in second position.
So, without "I år", it would be "Det är hundens år". Yes, it makes sense. Tack så micket
I said "Det här året är året av hunden", and not until my answer was marked incorrect did I intuit that "i år" is a similar construction to "ikväll" (tonight) or "i morgon" (tomorrow).
Isn't it a great feeling when the coin drops though? Even if you need a few clues first.
It's interesting that you don't have an expression like 'to-year' in English :)
Actually I find it terribly frustrating - that feeling of "I know this rule/sentence construction, why didn't I think of it BEFORE I wrote but after I already made the error".
Why "I år är det hundens år" and not "hundens året" since it's "the year"?
think like the English language, you say "the year" of the dog, but not the dog's "the year". Swedish doesn't really like the construct of "the x of the y", so they almost always use "the y's x", from what i read around this site (:
Just saw the answer to that in another thread: you don't use a definite form after a possessive because that's like saying "the dog's the year".
So can we say "detta år är det hundens år"? Or "det här är det hundens år"? Tack för svaret.
Yes, I was wondering the same, but I'd rather say "detta år är hundens år" or "det här året är hundens år". I think that in this case detta år/det här året is already the subject, so we don't need "det".
Does it also make sense to say "I år är året av hunden"? Or is it more grammatically correct to have it be the possessive of the dog ("hundens år")?
Exactly - we don't have the "of" possessive construction that English does.
I feel so inadequate ... I have basically been studying Swedish for about 8 weeks! Practising almost every day, but this really threw me for a loop!
Well, don't be discouraged - eight weeks is still the baby steps phase. I'm sure you'll get the hang of it! :)
Same here. I also study Swedish on Sfi in Sweden and work with their materials on my own, it's been 3 months of Sfi and Duolingo together and additional month of Duolingo only and I still don't get simplest things in the store, especially at the register. They always ask me something like 'is thar all' but I can't depict words. It's a hard language.
Is there also animal's year in Sweden such as China? The china's animal year is below. (rat-cow-tiger-rabbit-dragon-snake-horse-sheep-monkey-hen-dog-pig)
But there is actually a saying in Swedish, "hundår", a dog's year, meaning a very hard year. "Jag jobbade två år som skogshuggare. Det var riktiga hundår!"
Strange though since according to what I've heard the year of the dog is a hard year for those born under that sign
Maybe this sentence is referring more about Chinese customs in Swedish
No, not at all. If you take this sentence as a real sentence, it must be referring to Chinese traditions.
Det här året är det hundens år....I read the English with an emphasis on the words "this year" as distinguished from another. How am I wrong?
You're not, though it's a less likely interpretation. I've added it now.
Tack...It's what I'd tell my son when he insists it's the year of the dragon...
Swedish doesn't put the definite after a possessive. English does the same for "the x's y" constructions: you say "the dog's year" but not "the dog's the year".
I flipped it by typing "Det är hundens år i år", which is correct. It's a matter of style, I suppose.
It's a perfectly fine sentence, just a matter of the course generally trying not to change sentence construction too much. That's partially because a specific construction is occasionally being taught, but also partially because the manual labour in adding additional constructions in a lot of places would become hard to manage very quickly.
What do you get wrong, specifically? Maybe we can sort it out somehow? :)