"We go to a restaurant."
Translation:Vi går på restaurang.
61 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Why is it not "vi går på en restaurang" in this case if it's "we go to a restaurant"?
"Att gå" is to go or to walk, while "Att åka" is to go by a vehicle specifically.
Still don't get why it couldn't be att åka. Couldn't we go by car for instance, or would it have to be specified in the sentence?
So if I'm understanding this correctly, "på" can mean "on," "about," "for" and "to?" Or is there a different idea behind using it here?
Yes. But it's hard to generalise on when to use either. The practical and idiomatic use of cetrain prepositions can vary greatly even between relatively related languages. such as Swedish and English.
With this in mind, which preposition here would be the most common/accepted way of phrasing this?
Depends on what you mean. "Gå på restaurang" is more about being at a restaurant, but "gå till restaurang" is more about the getting there.
I think går implies that you walk to the location while aker is traveling by other means like bus
Without context, maybe we DID take a bus. I thought I finally got aker and gar straightened out, and now this.
I think maybe they mean generic "we're going somewhere" vs. We walk or We take a vehicle to the place. Like maybe it's the same as saying "We're going" if someone asks if you're joining them tonight? Cuz it wouldn't let me use åker either.
Given what Zmrzlina says above ('"Gå på restaurang" is more about being at a restaurant, but "gå till restaurang" is more about the getting there.'), maybe "åka på restaurang" would evoke that you actually drove the car/bus/&c inside the restaurant? Just guessing ...
674
I thought på restaurang implied to the restaurant, and en would be needed for a restaurant. Help
In some cases, Swedish doesn't need an article with nouns when you want them in English. These are actions that are kind of seen as a unit – it's almost like gå på restaurang is a verb in itself. There's some more about this type of construction here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/5824774
"Restauranting" sounds like the job description of a food critic to me. Maybe Swedes are natural gourmets? ;)
- 1198
There's a similar example involving British versus American English. Here in the U.S. we typically say were are in "the" hospital, whereas my British friends tend to leave out the "the." I'm guessing Swedish prefers the British approach when speaking of restaurants. (?)
Brits actually say both but it depends on the context. If I'm in the hospital (visiting a friend for example) I'd say "I'm in the hospital" but if I'm a patient in a hospital bed I'd say "I'm in hospital".
Why here i can use en before restaurang but it isnt a must use word? Another translation said vi går på restaurang
Fixed phrase. "Gå på place". Can't explain really when you used it, but here are some examples:
Gå på restaurang (duh)
gå på bio (go to the cinema, go to the movies)
gå på teater (go to the theater)
gå på konsert (go to a concert)
If you say "Vi åker till en restaurang", then you're saying that you're leaving now specifically by means of a vehicle. Far more specific than what English "We are going to a restaurant" communicates.
so, "vi åker till en restaurang" isn't wrong actually, is it? it just means something specific
It's still wrong. It means that if you want to say you are going to a restaurant you used only that phrase, that's why is called fixed (kinda).
In the "Grandmother and grandfather want us to go to a restaurant." exercise, the standard translation is "Mormor och morfar vill att vi åker på restaurang." In this exercise, åker is marked wrong. What's the difference in usage?
What’s wrong with “Vi åker på restaurang.”? I thought ‘åker’ rather means ‘(to) leave’, but in a similar exercise, “[…] want us to go to a restaurant.”, the translation of ‘go’ is ‘åker’.
- 683
We are given the English first. However, no context is given. Consider these two different scenarios:
1."Since your kitchen was destroyed in a fire, what do you do for food?" "We go to a restaurant".
2. "Every year on our anniversary we go to a restaurant that we discovered when we were courting".
In 1, "we go to a restaurant" is a general statement that means the same as "we go out to eat". Here Swedish would say "Vi går på restaurant".
In 2, we are talking about going to a specific place. Swedish would use "Vi går/aker på een restaurant". Swedish would use "går"if we walk and "aker" if we drive.
Corrections welcome!
Why cant the question be " we are going to a restaurant?" That makes more sense to me when translating "vi går på restaurang" because går is moving, or walking, and it makes better sense to me.
I put 'vi gå till en restaurang' and was marked wrong. I thought 'går' was 'going', like you would only say går when you were actually on your way there. Am i wrong?
You can't use gå because that would be the infinitive, rather than the present tense. It sounds like you thought går was only present continuous, but in Swedish the present form and the present continuous forms are the same word. They don't usually make that distinction (Although, you learn how to in another lesson).
Or maybe you are confused by thinking that the English sentence is in the infinitive. It's not. Like "See Spot go.", it is present tense. Infinitive would be something like "We have to go to a restaurant" rather than "We go" which is nearly the same as "We are going".
Looks to me like that is missing a preposition. You can't say "We go restaurant".
Fixed phrase. "Gå på place". Can't explain really when you use it, but here are some examples:
Gå på restaurang (duh)
gå på bio (go to the cinema, go to the movies)
gå på teater (go to the theater)
gå på konsert (go to a concert)
If you say "Vi åker till en restaurang", then you're saying that you're leaving now specifically by means of a vehicle. Far more specific than what English "We are going to a restaurant" communicates.
Could you use 'till restaurang' here instead of 'på restaurang'? If not, what is the difference?
Where is the "en" in this sentence??? Sometimes I lost my confidence with Duolingo in learning Swedish
Why isnt any 'en' used in the sentence if theres a 'a' in the english translation?
I don't think it is wrong, as none of the course moderators have said so. I just reported it as it seems correct to me.
why do you use the verb "att gä ", which means to walk, instead of " to go" ? Thanks for your svar. Rosetta