1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Danish
  4. >
  5. "Det er vist en and?"

"Det er vist en and?"

Translation:That is probably a duck?

January 29, 2015



I wonder if Duo would accept "That is probably a hoax?", because "Det er vist en and?" is what Danes would say about a false, or doubtful article in a newspaper.


I agree totally. And I'm a native Dane.


not just articles but in general, if something seems amiss, it's a duck.


Wow, that's what it is in Hungarian, too! Does anyone know the origin of this?


According to (German, because we use that expression, too) Wikipedia, the origin is unclear, but it probably comes from the French "donner de canards" - "to give ducks", which means "to lie". Why that is, no one really knows, though. Says that the duck may have been assumed to be an unreliable brooder.


Why hello there fellow Hungarian viking apprentice


It is not a question. Why is there a question mark ?


Because, in English at least, something can be said in that tone with a question mark to show that it was a questionable question.

So this would be (again, in English at least) the answer to "What is that?"


Idiot: "What is that?"

Sarcastic person: "Erm, that's probably a duck?"


I would put a question mark to express uncertainty in the statement. As in, that is probably a duck, but I am not really sure.


The problem is very difficult to tell the tone from a robotic voice.


I feel 'it is probably a duck?' is grammatcally incorrect' but you could say 'it is perhaps a duck?'. Probably carries a greater degree of certainty, making it sound stilted in this context?


That's a little odd, then, because vist means "surely, certainly", which is an even greater degree of certainty. :)

This Danish sentence sounds like "I don't doubt this is a duck. ... Isn't it?"


I tried it must be a duck, but that wasn't accepted. This whole section is so very idiomatic. The sort of thing that translators have to rewrite completely to make it flow.

[deactivated user]

    Well, if it walks and quacks like one...


    Came here specifically for this comment. Am not disappointed. Vil du gerne købe en and?


    Would "Is that supposed to be a duck?" also be a potential meaning of this?


    Could one substitute "nok" in vist in this context?


    I would say that it could be used as you suggest, but it will then be more making a conclusion than a suggestion.


    Joseph Bevis: Actually you can also hear that the voice poses a question, because the last word is high in pitch.


    Why not "Is that probably a duck"?


    Because this is not a.. do you say "interrogative question"? It's not a standard question where the subject and object are inverted. That would be "Er det vist en and?", like in English.
    Although vist wouldn't really fit here if you're unsure what it is. Måske would be better.


    Betyder "That is a duck, right?" noget anderledes?


    Jeg tror at det er lignende nok.


    It could be a cormorant. Or a coot. Or, at a distance, a Goose. Or…


    How do you know the difference between "It is probably a duck" versus "That is probably a duck".... I've always been confused by "Det" in contexts like this.


    Daniel, would that even make a difference in English? :)

    When you have den, det or de in such a predicative position (i.e. separated from the noun it refers to by a verb), you can translate it as either "it/they" or "that/those". Danish doesn't care.

    • Jeg tror det er umuligt. - I think it/that is impossible.
    • Den var så smuk. - It/that was so beautiful.
    • De er mine venner. - They/those are my friends.

    You can increase the "that"-ness, though, by saying "den der", "det der" or "de der" if you want. It'll have a meaning of "that object over there".


    Is this a figure of speech?


    It is also that. Please see my comment at the top of this page.


    Yes, like when you in English say "you're pulling my leg", they're actually not. Neither does it actually rain cats and dogs when it does that!


    This sentence has a spelling error. The word should not be "vist" (shown), but instead "vidst" in order to make any sense


    Absolutely not! Vist stems from vished (being certain) and not from at vide (to know).


    Der er vist en and, makes sense and Det er vidst en and? Makes sense


    Yes to the first sentence (although it completely miss the point in this phrase). Absolutely no to the second. Just plain wrong. It's a common mistake (like their, there, they're), but nevertheless wrong.


    The audio is wrong. Det er vist en and. Here vist should not sound like that in this sentence. The audio of ..vist.. is a re-use of a word from . i.e. Jeg har vist dig min nye bil .. eller jeg har vist dig vejen (hen til skolen) eller. Here, however, it should be pronounced more like.. veest en and


    vist en and is pronounced wrongly. Duo, you use the pronunciation of a different word. vist - shown. Here it is having a different meaning! Please consider


    Putting a question mark does not suggest sarcasm. It is a statement! <---

    Learn Danish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.