"He does not know it either."
Translation:Det vet inte han heller.
39 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
What's the difference between 'det vet inte han hellerä and 'han vet inte det heller'?
This structure doesn't make the tiniest bit of sense to me. Why is Det the noun instead of Han? It doesn't know him either? What?! Shouldn't it be Han vet inte heller? I now loathe the "assemble the phrase" exercises, they go for the most obscure structures.
In this case the stress is on the "that/it". As in "That I do not know, either." However, I agree with you that this is not obvious when all we see is the English sentence "He does not know it, either."
It is not him (honom) it is he (han). Han is a subject pronoun. So it is the subject of the sentence.
Why does 'inte' come before 'han'? Could anyone explain the rule please? I thought it would be just 'Det vet han into heller.' Thanks.
In this case it depends on what inte is negating.
Det vet inte han heller = Person X does not know it, and 'he' does not know it either
Det vet han inte heller = 'He' does not know fact X, and he does not know det (the thing that the sentence refers to) either
1012
But how is one to get from the English sentence starting with 'he' that 'it' is what is to be negated? And why can't the Swedish sentence at least also start with 'han'?
Is "det vet han inte heller" really a faulty sentence or does it have a different meaning?
vet is to know a fact, känner is to know, be aquainted with a person
antingen is only used in the combination antingen – eller, which means 'either – or', so it doesn't fit here.
If this helps anyone, I kind of look at this one as "that he does not know either" helps me remember and wrap my head round it abit. Obviously please correct me if i'm wrong. :)
I see you're quite advanced in German. The "jag vet" vs "jag känner" scenario is exactly the same as "ich weiß" vs "ich kenne". I hope this helps.
Whenever you like, same with icke but icke is old-fashioned and ej is mostly used in formal situations or for announcements and on signs and such.
Ej is however seemingly preferred in certain expressions, such as "tro det eller ej".
I am really confused about the grammar for 'vet' in relation to 'det'. Can anyone explain this? I find it difficult to learn how to structure these sentences :'(
That's actually pretty easy – it's just that the verb has to go in second place in the sentence. So if you put det first, the verb vet goes after it, and if you put han first, the verb also goes right after that. Basically vet just stays put in second place whatever you change in the rest of the sentence.
So the first time I used (in the wrong order, I admit) "inte", but the suggested answer used the word "ej". The second time I used "ej" and was marked wrong for not using "Inte". Make up your mind, eh?
So, I got as far as the V2 rule, but why is this incorrect: "Det vet han eller inte?"
I believe because "inte" modifies the verb, it has to come much closer, not at the very end.
Yeah this still makes no sense. It looks like the "it" is the thing that is not knowing him. Like if the " it" were a monster and the monster didn't know the him.
I answered "han vet det inte heller" and it was marked correct. Is this legit or stupid?
- 968
Can i also just say "det vet han heller"? It feels like it should work, I'm not gonna waste my hearts on trying it though