"Hon lär hunden hämta tidningen."

Translation:She is teaching the dog to get the newspaper.

February 4, 2015

This discussion is locked.


the ''correct solution'' says ''she teaches her dog to fetch the newspaper''. i'm a little confused why it's not ''the dog''. i don't see henne, or sin before hunden.


There can be more than one correct solution. I think by showing "her dog" as the default solution, they're trying to indicate that hunden doesn't always have to be "the dog", it just always has to be definitive, so one dog in particular, and "her dog" works equally well.

I agree it's a bit confusing the first time.


In which cases is 'lär ut' necessary? Only when it's ambiguous whether the subject is themselves doing the learning or the teaching? Like, 'hon lär svenska' would require either 'lär ut' or 'lär sig', but anything else?


To lära ut is necessary for teaching or making someone learn something. To lära sig is used for learning. Using lär on its own is uncommon.


To clarify: ut is necessary when what you teach is a noun, Hon lär ut svenska 'She teaches Swedish' but not used when it's a clause, like in this example.


So it's the difference between the transitive (duolingo lär mig svenska) and intransitive (duolingo lär ut svenska) usages, but ut takes the place of an object because lära is transitive only (unlike English to teach which is transitive and intransitive)?


I think both are transitive, it's just that lär ut is a particle verb that works a bit differently.

Lära can be used intransitively too, but in most cases the counterpart to to teach would be att undervisa instead.


Okay, I think I'm understanding better :)


Seems like this sentence ought to have an "att".


I have the same question. Why isn't the correct translation Hon lär hunden att hämta tidningen. Is lära one of those verbs that doesn't require the infinitive marker att or is the att optional? Another related question: Hon lär hunden hämta tidningen. was accepted as correct, but as I read through my Routledge Swedish Dictionary, I see that to teach someone something the construction should be lära ut. This point was discussed at the top of this discussion. So, if I understand Arnauti's comment, ut is not required here because 'the something' being taught is 'hämta tidningen' which is not a noun. So lära by itself is synonymous with träna = to train (or perhaps utbilda) Am I getting close to understanding this?


Interested in the answer to this


hon lär sin hund att hämta tidningen was allowed first time round and now is rejected. This unit is becoming very irritating. Is there a way to skip it and get on with something more sensible_


Can we have att hämts here


Yes ( "att hämta tidningen")

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