Translation:All the things were carried out of the house.
(I think) this is the first time I've come across ur, could anyone explain ur v av? Tack :)
It means "from" or "out of". And when it means "from" it's usually in the sense of "out of". So while there's a little overlap, av usually means just "of" or "by", or "from" in other senses than "out of".
Yup! Pronounced [bæːʂ] with a long ä, unlike bärs [bæʂ] which means "beer" in Swedish and the s-word that means excrement in Norwegian and Danish. :)
any reason why we cannot translate this as "were taken out" instead of "were carried out"?
Yes, it's because that would be a translation of togs ut rather than bars ut.
Alla saker should mean all things, and alla sakerna as all the things. Can anyone explain the logic here? ?
We're allowing translations between definite and indefinite both ways here, since it's so idiomatic to use either for the same meaning.
Hi there, I'm new to the perifrastic passive as a concept, though it seems familiar to the lesson on past participles, so I'll need to go back and redo those lessons as a whole. Anyway, I'm just trying to get my head around it and any differences in meaning with the s-passive.
So in this case, an alternative translation and perhaps a more accurate nuance of meaning (if I've understood the comments from the moderators in discussions about other examples) would be 'All the things were BEING carried out of the house'? Whereas, 'Alla saker var barits ut ur huset' means 'All the things were carried out the house' where the sense is of something that has been completed?
I'm sorry if this is a little convoluted - I hope it makes sense! I'm just try to find a rationale to favour one form over the other under different circumstances, or if indeed they can be used interchangeably.
Youre first assumption is absolutely correct, but var barits isn't valid Swedish. You could say e.g. var utburna for the "had been carried out of the house some time in the past" sense, for instance.