- Forum >
- Topic: Swedish >
- "Har du boken med dig?"
29 Comments
I thought that if the noun has a definite article, it could mean possession. But your book was not accepted. Am I missing something?
1453
It applies for things that you are expected to have, and where it would be most natural that you would be speaking about your own one. Like jag borstar tänderna – not everyone has teeth, but there's an expectation that most people do, and that you would be most likely to brush your own teeth. In those contexts we don't say min/mitt/mina since it's so obvious, instead we just use the definite form.
Without context, people aren't expected to have their own book with them, so without more information than we have here, boken just means the book.
I came here to ask precisely this because I just had "Jag tar på mig skorna" where the definiteness of 'the shoes' is used instead of the possessiveness of "mina" (my) shoes to indicate that they belong to the person making the statement. That led me to believe that this sentence could mean that the book belongs to the person being asked the question.
Hi JYH6UtXB. A book is not as personal as shoes and much less so than a leg or an arm.
I get the difference, but there was also version with "did" as alternative right answer. Is there similar tense in Swedish?
- 1453
Did you bring the book? was an accepted answer here by mistake, and I'm removing it now. That sentence should preferrably be translated into Swedish as Tog du med dig boken?
The thing is, those sentences might be used in the exact same context sometimes, but that doesn't mean they are good translations of each other in terms of this course.
- 1348
the notes indicate that this means 'bring with you' so it's very annoying to be marked wrong when you write just that!
Your translation is more to the point, cleaner than DL's i.m.o. But DL's translation is closer to the Swedish. Sometimes you have to live with rejection until DL changes the range of acceptances. Can take time. Have you reported it?
This doesn't really look like a verb that is both reflexive and a particle?
I can see and understand why e.g. "bryr mig om" is "special" but this doesn't seem the same to me?
- 1453
It's a particle because med is always stressed, and reflexive because the reflexive pronoun changes with person:
jag har med mig
du har med dig
hon har med sig
vi har med oss
ni har med er
de har med sig
An interesting thing is that the order is different here, as compared to bryr sig om.
Is "Har med sig" the verb in this sentence? Is this any different than the English "has with oneself" or do they mean exactly the same thing?
Yes, "har med sig" is the verb, and it means pretty much the same thing as the English.
I'm a bit confused about how the phrase can be broken up. This one seperates the verb with the particle and pronoun, but 'tar av sig' doesn't. Is it just memory or are there patterns and rules?
Because it's a question, I think? I could be completely off the mark here though. I'm really not sure myself if this is even correct but:
- Han har med sig boken.
-
Har du boken med sig?
-
Han tar av sig hatten.
- Tar du hatten av sig?
- 1453
Remember that the reflexive pronoun must match the subject: it must be Har du boken med dig? and Tar du hatten av dig?
The latter is possible, but it sounds somewhat odd, I would definitely prefer Tar du av dig hatten? If you put hatten first, you stress that word very strongly, as if the context were: I really expected you to take your shoes off, but now you're taking your HAT off?
Fronting the thing you've brought in this way seems more natural to me than fronting the thing you are taking off, but Har du med dig boken? is still the default word order and Har du boken med dig? is more special.
Can someone please explain why doesn't this mean "Do you bring the book?". I was just introduced to this new verb, and then next question uses it but does not accept, even as an option, the previous meaning. I read all the answers but none of them really explain why. Tack för hjälpen!
Hi Ernesto. The literal translation is: -do you have the book with you?- This translates into: -did you bring the book?-
Hi there Jan, I'm sure I'm missing something rather obvious but the only difference I'm spotting is the use of the past tense in "Did you bring the book". Maybe "Do you bring the book" is unidiomatic English and therefore not an accepted translation?
If you make an agreement to meet someone you could ask: -Do you bring the book? -Ska du ta boken?- in a future sense. Or also-Will you bring the book? - Har du boken med dig?- refers to the situation where you have met and ask -Did you bring the book?-
I fully understand the examples you gave me, but still don't get why Duo didn't accept my answer. Basically in your examples you can use this sentence to refer to something that you already did (bring the book, or asking if you did) or something that will happen (ska ta). I will pretend though that I'm right thinking that "do you bring the book" is not accepted because of the present tense. I guess this is the kind of thing I'll look back to in some months from now and wonder what I did not understand at the time. I'm a native Spanish speaker and would be glad to help you if needed. Thanks for your help again!
