1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "Det är viktigt med effektivi…

"Det är viktigt med effektivitet."

Translation:Efficiency is important.

February 15, 2015



"For efficiency" sounds far more natural in English, but is not accepted. I don't even know what "important with efficiency" is supposed to mean in English.


The suggested translation is Efficiency is important, which is what the Swedish sentence means. If with 'for' you mean a sentence like 'It is important for efficiency', that sentence has a quite different meaning and would be Det är viktigt för effektiviteten or something like that in Swedish.
I wrote a longer explanation of this sentence on its reverse forum here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/6742313


What do you think about this translation: "It is important to be efficient."


No, the importance of efficiency is not quite the same thing as the importance of being efficient. Your suggestion corresponds to Det är viktigt att vara effektiv in Swedish.


There is a huge difference between efficiency and effectivity, is this really the right translation??? (efficiency is doing things right, effectivity is doing the right things)


Just FYI for others, MennoGraaf's definitions are incorrect.

efficiency means doing things quickly, without wasting time, resources, or effort

effectivity means doing things that accomplish the desired result

Usually, one has to make a choice between being effective or being efficient. You can make something crappy really fast (efficient), or you can make something nice if you take lots of time (effective). To be both efficient and effective is usually the most challenging and most desired way.


I disagree that doing something quickly but badly would be efficient - I certainly wouldn't use the word that way (as a native British English speaker). Any effort that doesn't achieve the desired result is by definition inefficient - the time, effort, and resources were wasted after all.


Same here in most cases, but it's important to remember that the differentiation actually does matter in a number of cases in science and engineering where it's important to evaluate something both on how correct the result is (the effectiveness of the approach) and how well it utilizes available resources to achieve that result (the efficiency of the approach).


I agree! Does Swedish differentiate between efficiency and effectivity?


Nope, we use effektivitet for both. I would wager it's one of the words with the highest error rates in translation into English by native Swedes.


Effectivity: "obtain the desired result"


I like your reply the best. A short an efficient use of words to create an effective explanation.


And at least you can accept both, now when i use effectivity it is not accepted...


Sure, I don't know why that wasn't accepted.


If swedes make so many mistakes with this word, you don’t know what the intention was and a literal translation is best. Therefor effectivity. You need to give them the advantage of the doubt. I have some swedish friends who know the difference immediately, just as i know many non-swedish who also mix them up, like you do here...


I don't really follow that logic. Since Swedes make many mistakes using a word, the least likely interpretation of it should be used as the default? And why do you say that we "mix them up here"?


I disagree. Most times when I say effektivitet, I mean efficiency. I am very confident this is the case for a majority of Swedes. And I know the definitions well, you don't need to tell me what the words mean.


In my world the most likely translation of the word "effektivitet" is effectivity, not efficiency. Just for the record, Efficiency is doing things well, effectivityis doing the right things. Rest assured, not just Swedes mix these up... And with mixing them up, I mean that people translate "effektivitet" with efficiency...


To be more explicit. Efficiency: "a situation in which a person, company, factory, etc. obtain the desired result using resources such as time, materials, or labour without any waste".


I find this quite confusing, because it looks like it's saying that [something] is important [in relation to] efficiency.

Are there any handy ways to remember that it means 'efficiency is important'? I couldn't see any clues in the words or the structure that it would mean that.


It seems to be a pattern in Swedish, where we would say, "Efficiency is important," they say, "It is important with efficiency."

The pattern is:

It is _ with ___.

The first blank is a value judgement (important).

The second blank is the thing that is being judged or described (efficiency).

Another example of this pattern is:

It is good with food.
"good" is the value judgement "food" is the thing being judged/described (Actually, I think the phrase used is "Det var gott med mat," not "Det är....")

Maybe an alternate translation will help you remember:

"It is" is a way to start a lot of sentences in Swedish, even if the rest of the sentence doesn't match.

Then "med" can function like "to have."

Det är gott med mat = It is good with food = It is good to have food

Det är viktigt med effektivite = It is good with efficiency = It is good to have efficiency

Idk if this helps. Hopefully a native Swedish speaker will comment if I have made any mistakes here.


Sounds about right. :)


Is this construction basically to avoid beginning a general statement with a particular noun, e.g. "Effektivitet är viktigt" or "Ost på knäckebrödet är gott"? I know there are other examples in the course.

It seems that Swedish consistently prefers to use "Det är ...", using the impersonal subject to introduce general statements, or to think of it another way, placing the most vague/general words first and the most specific/particular words at the end. Maybe that can help non-native speakers identify this sort of sentence structure more easily.


Yes, that's a good way of putting it. We're very fond of det är and similar constructions, and though that is not a rule, it's definitely a common tendency.


Oh good! Thank you for checking!

Woohoo! I learned something, lol!


Thanks a lot for your useful explanation. It helps me a lot.


It is good with food means something completely different in English, though; you would use it when describing something as being a nice accompaniment to food, e.g. beer is good with food. How would one translate that sentiment into Swedish? I would have written something like det är bra med mat, but based on this question that would mean food is important... I'm so confused :D


Is there a difference in meaning between "Det är viktigt med effektivitet" och "efdektivitet är viktigt" ? Or is the second one just wrong ?


I said "The effectiveness is important." Is that a valid secondary meaning?


I think your sentence means that something specific has had the desired effect, while the Swedish sentence talks about efficiency in general.


I tried "it is important to be efficient" and it wasn't accepted - can someone explain what I'm missing? (Have read both the comment threads here as well as the reverse translation)


The meanings are admittedly pretty close. It's largely because while det är x med y is a Swedish construction that English usually doesn't really have, det är x att vara y is a construction that both languages have.

So "it is important to be efficient" would be much better translated as det är viktigt att vara effektiv in Swedish.

  • 1833

Why not just effektiviteten är viktig?


We do accept effektivitet är viktigt, but not the definite since we're talking about efficiency in general.


effective = successfully accomplished efficient = accomplished without wasted time (or resources or effort)

Something can be one and not the other, or both.

I am translating "effektivitet" to "efficiency" as the more common meaning, even though the Swedish word could also mean "effectiveness."

Does this make sense, mods?


Yes, that is correct.


Although "effectivity" is a word (attested by the new OED and Webster's Third Internation, but not the original OED and smaller dictionaries like Webster's Collegiate [10th ed]), it is far less common than "effectiveness."


Until I looked at this thread I'd never heard such a word as "effectivity" in my life. Do some folk actually say it? As far as I've ever heard the word is "effectiveness".


The correct translation I was given was, "It is important with efficiency." That is not correct English.


That was already removed, as far as I can see. I think that may have been a bug.


Can't you just say "effektivitet är viktigt"?


That's also accepted, just not nearly as idiomatic.


This is just a bad translation.


I wrote "effektivitet är viktigt", and it was marked as wrong. Is that not a correct option?


We actually do accept that. And this is supposed to be the thread for "type what you hear" exercises. So assuming it wasn't "type what you hear", there must have been a bug.


I di not agree with thid English translation. The Wedish, says clearly" its important with efficiency", if the answer is "efficiency is important", then "Effektivitet är viktigt" should be posed as the statement to be translated.


That's how idiomatics works. English would absolutely never use "it's important with efficiency" when "efficiency is important" was meant. But Swedish does that all of the time. Teaching that one very common construction in one language corresponds to a different very common construction in another language is a really important step in the learning process, and we'd do you a huge disfavour if we didn't do that here.


Sorry for the typos, i didnt have my glasses on....


Is there a difference in meaning between "Effektivitet är viktigt" and "Det är viktigt med effektivitet"?


Effektivitet är viktigt. Would mean the same. Would it not?

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