"Det er vist en and?"
Translation:That is probably a duck?
38 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
3345
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.
Wow, that's what it is in Hungarian, too! Does anyone know the origin of this?
- 1578
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.
It's also the same in English, except we use the word 'canard', for which reason the expression is seen as a bit sophisticated.
- 104
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?"
i.e.:
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.
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?
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.
- 1578
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?"
Came here specifically for this comment. Am not disappointed. Vil du gerne købe en and?
I would say that it could be used as you suggest, but it will then be more making a conclusion than a suggestion.
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
This weird modern trend of turning a statement into a question purely by intonation drives me bonkers.
I agree. But also this is wrong in duolingo. In the presented form it's a statement, not a question. If a question, it would be phrased: "Er det ikke en and?", or "Mon ikke det er en and?".
Joseph Bevis: Actually you can also hear that the voice poses a question, because the last word is high in pitch.
- 1578
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.
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!
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.
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
- 806
In this sentence the word "vist" in Danish means "probably" in English. But it is pronounced to meaning "shown" in English which does not fit here.
I can't wait to use this expression next time I hear something that sounds fishy.