In English, stand can be used in other ways as well, like "he stands for that cause" or "that acronym stands for this." Is this the same in Swedish?
Jag står för vad jag tycker = I stand for what I think
FN står för Förena Nationerna = UN stands for the United Nations
I noticed that when I hover the mouse over 'sitter' and 'står', it comes up with the definition 'is'. Is this a mistake and should be 'sits' and 'stands'?
Not a mistake. In different contexts those words can translate to is. "A river lies in the valley and a dam stands at the end" would be just as good as saying "A river is in the valley and a dam is at the end". Swedish has that same interchangeability, but to a greater degree.
No. It's comparable to how English would differ "stoor" and "store" respectively.
I hear a clear o (as in å) sound in the normal speed version. This is how we normally say it, although the k sound is sometimes pronounced when we speak more clearly.
I think it's because there's a consonant after it, but I'm not too sure.. A kh sound where the h is pronounced doesn't sound like it should be in a language like Swedish, but that's my opinion.
Not really. Och is most always pronounced just O or Å in speech unless empasized.
Does Swedish have both present and (I think this is correct) present perfect tenses? To me, it seems that the Swedish word "sitter" can translate to English as either "sits" (present tense) or "is sitting" (present perfect tense). Based on this example, I perceive that Swedish has only one form of present tense verbs. Is this correct?
**Correction: "is sitting" is continuous present tense. Does Swedish have this?
Yes, the verbs in this course can usually translate into English present tense or into English present continuous because the Swedish doesn't usually care to show the distinction. However, later in the course there are explicitly continuous constructions of these verbs.
In the match one they said står was is, ive found that half of those "match the two" have one wrong pair.