If you mean 'full' as in after a filling meal, that is mätt in Swedish, full does not have that meaning.
What about things other than people? Like "the glass is full" or "the gas tank is full".
Sorry, I mistyped a lot. I was saying "mätt" means 'full' in English? such as.. when you say "I'm full." & "The bus is full."..
No. "Mätt" is only used to mean full like satiated with a belly full. Swedish "full" is used to refer to everything else like "The bus is full", with the exception of when it is used to refer to a person. That is when it means "drunk" instead.
Also people, don´t mix this up with "ful", which means ugly.
To answer your question: yes, I have said "jag är ful" before.
To prevent that misunderstanding ... I always associate "ful" (one l) with the English word "foul" which i think may be a cognate.
See Zmrzlina's response to ceciliabertol's similar question elsewhere in this thread. "Ful" has a longer vowel than "full".
i thought the u sounded long in this example. it doesn't go quickly to the ll
How can I understand the difference just hearing the two words "ful" and "full"? Because in this case I spelled it wrong
Those are excellent discernable differences. Sometimes the voice on duolingo is not as discernable. I'll explore that site for other pronunciations. One of the most difficult for me is simply finding the best pronunciation of ''är''. I hear it so many different ways.
full in Swedish (about people) only means 'drunk', it does not mean 'satisfied' as in 'has eaten enough'. That would be mätt.
Would "jag är full av mat" ever be said or is it awkward? Like after Thanksgiving I'm not just no longer hungry, I am literally full to the brim with food.
It's not grammatically wrong, but it sounds strange. A Swede might say "jag är jättemätt" or something like that, I think.
wait. so does "full" (at LEAST phonetically) mean drunk, full, AND ugly? ???
No, full (drunk) has a short u and a long l sound, whereas ful (ugly) has a long u and a short l sound. The difference is very clear to a native speaker.
Drunks always say that.
On the other hand, has anyone else noticed that stoners never deny that they're stoned? Quite the opposite: they delight in sharing the fact to anyone within earshot.
I am not English nor Swedish, but I study both of them. My translation was: "I am not drunken", and it wasn't accepted by Duo. My dictionary gives "drunken" and "drunk" as the English equivalents for the Swedish "full"
As a native English speaker (but not an expert), I'd say that the adjective "drunken" requires an object. In other words, you can say "what shall we do with the drunken sailor", but not "what shall we do with the sailor who is drunken".
In general, "drunken" isn't really used in modern English outside of set phrases like the song I quoted. Stick with "drunk" in all cases and you should be fine.