I actually did this phrase wrong because instinctively added the word "tonight" at the end !
Hmm, must have been something you said.
nah .... I keep looking for something .....
You should have walked away.
It must have been something you said...
Thank you for this lol
And this is why we need sina!
That would be "he died in his own arms"
I believe the point was that the word sina exists to make phrases such as this one unambiguous. :)
Am I missing something about object and subject? This reads to me, he died in his own arms, not in somebody else's arms.
If it had been his own arms, we would have said sina. In English, it is ambiguous. In Swedish, it isn't.
Why isn't it "han dog I honoms armar"?
That form does not exist.
The possessive pronoun is hans (like his in English).
honom is the object form of han (like him in English).
So 'honoms' would be like 'hims' in English :)
"Died of" and "died in" both translate to "dog i". This would be confusing if it wasn't for the hans/sin distinction!
Um, no? "Died of" would be "dog av".
That's what I would have thought, and maybe it is an alternative or more correct way of phrasing it, but I was referring to this translation: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/6594367
Oh. You're right, it can be used that way too, when dying of disease.
Does this literally mean dying in someone's arms? Or is it a metaphor?
Literal, my friend.
I don't get the "it must have been something you said" reference, but everytime I see this sentence I think of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWEm49c4TRI