not sure if it is purposeful, but i dislike that there are sentences that get used repeatedly verbatim. things like "where does the cat run to" or "i like coffee but i love tea" could easily be made more random so they dont become rote memory responses, but real responses. Maybe its something with linguistic learning i dont know and is being used, but if not the program should be more flexible. even just "i like [drink] but i love [other drink]" instead of always coffee/tea (using my second example) or "where does [the animal] run to" instead of always using cat. It will reinforce more different vocab, and dissuade inadvertent rote memorization
I think you have a point. We should try to write more sentences to make the course more varied, in fact we're already working on that. I'll add some for the examples you mentioned, but the course is pretty big and hard to have a total view of, so it's helpful if you or others can report (here) where you feel there's least variation, and we'll try to add more sentences on those skills/words first.
PS the only reason why there's little variation sometimes is that we wanted to launch the course as soon as possible.
But in general its not just Swedish (btw congrats on getting out of beta!!) but German which has been on for a long time! It is like the programming on reviewing a lesson only reviews 3 words max. Same sentence in the same language translation within 4 questions is not helping with my swedish or german!! Tack och danke :)
You're right about the 3 words thing, in order for a course to be released there needs to be a minimum of 3 sentences for each word. I don't know about German, it was produced in-house long ago and those courses work a little differently. But just answering questions and adding new alternative translations takes a lot of time, so it's hard for us volunteers to keep up anyway. But writing new sentences is fun!
I guess this should be directed at the programmers, not the moderators (though they need to give input since they know the languages)
I more specifically mean that if you have a situation where sentence structure will not be affected. For example, in the cases that I used, it will not change the structure or meaning if you randomize what is "liked" and what is "loved" (in some languages this might be affected though). The program could be slightly flexible in allowing all [drinks] or [drinks and food] as the objects (any in the vocab list already covered)
I guess part of the problem is I'm not sure of the mechanics and the behind the scenes of how the programs are created and how they work (though your answers above enlighten me a bit).