1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Swedish
  4. >
  5. "I eat meat, but not pork."

"I eat meat, but not pork."

Translation:Jag äter kött men inte fläskkött.

March 13, 2015



I was wondering, in English, it would be more likely to hear "I eat meat. except for pork" What is the word for 'except"?


"Förutom" would be what I think you mean. "De har allt, förutom bilen"

I don't know if it works in Swedish in the way you described though.


"Förutom" and "utom" would both be valid options. The difference between "men" and "utom" more or less mirrors the difference between "but" and "except for". There is a slight difference in emphasis. If you say "Jag äter kött men inte fläskkött", you emphasize that you DO eat meat.


In my head eating meat, but not pork is a slight contradiction. Pork is meat, so it is not even a necessary sentence. You could just say, I do not eat pork, whereas with 'except for' the statement acknowledges that there is an exception to the rule of which meats you eat, the 'but' sentence treats it as if they are separate. Like 'I eat carrots, but not broccoli.', as oppose to, 'I eat vegetables, except for spinach.' Do you you see what i mean?


Well in a mathematic context it makes sense. I like (all) the numbers, except for 13.

I understand what you say, but the expression is not negating that pork is meat, nor that you like all kinds of pork. Exactly the opposite, you like almost all, except pork.

This is exactly my case, i can't eat pork because it gets me sick. Someone serves me pork so i say "no thanks" he replies "i thought you eat meat" then i say "i do eat meat, except pork".


I understand it with 'except (for)' but I don't think it makes sense with 'but'.


It would be a great answer if someone is trying to determine the dietary needs of dinner guests. It'd be common to ask...

Are you vegetarian? Do you eat meat?


In English, you would say 'I eat meat, but not pork'. If you wanted to use 'except' it would make more sense, to me, to say 'I eat all meat, except pork'.


I used "utan" instead of "men" and was marked wrong. What's the difference between the two words?


"Utan" is used when you negate the first part. I see you speak Spanish. The equivalent of "utan" would be "sino".

"Jag har inte tre, utan fyra bilar." "I don't have three, but four cars."


For those who speak German, the equivalent of "utan" is "sondern". Using your example sentence: "Ich habe nicht drei, sondern vier Autos."


That makes sense. Tak så mycket!


what is the exact difference between "svin" and "fläsk"? is fläsk specifically referring to pork meat?


Yes. svin only refers to the animal. There are two words for the animal, gris and svin. Gris is probably the more common one. Here's a link to a site that tries to sort out the difference between gris and svin in Swedish: http://www.falkblick.se/2009/06/svin-eller-gris.html


Interesting, I wrongly put "Notkött", and Duo gave me "Griskött" as the correction. Which is better, "Griskött" or "Fläskkött"?


I would say just “fläsk”


Same here, though I should note that fläskkött is much better than griskött, in my opinion.


I said "Jag äter kött fast inte fläskkött." That is correct as well!


That's better as e.g. "although", not "but".


why inte? I believed it to be inget.


inte is used to negate verbs (like not), and ingen/inget/inga is used to negate nouns (like no).


but pork is a noun, and in this case i can also say that i eat no pork. it confused me :/


Yes, it works the same in Swedish: I eat no pork = Jag äter inget fläskkött.
and I don't eat pork =Jag äter inte fläskkött.


Has the same meaning, but is more formal. Basically it's never used in speech, but you can see it on signs sometimes.


What is the difference between utan and men?


utan is always in response to a negative, and it's in the "but rather" sense.


We use utan in response to a negative. So it's more like "but rather". If the sentence had started "I don't eat meat, but [...]", then utan would have been correct.


thanks for clarifying! here's a lingot for you :3


I have never heard anyone say “fläskkött” for pork, just “fläsk” so it should be accepted.


Would I still put a comma after 'kött' to indicate a pause/break in thought?


It is not advised to use comma to separate the sub-clause from the main clause when a conjunction is in place (men in this case). However, a sentence like Jag behövde inte lyssna, jag förstod ändå. = I did not need to listen, I understood anyway. requires comma to separate the two clauses. Please refer to this link for more details.


Whats the difference between "men" and "eller"? I had to guess on this


men means 'but' and eller means 'or'.


Knowing when to use inte or ej?

I used "jag ater kott, men inte flaskkott" and got it wrong. Apparently meant to be "..., men ej flaskkott"


You probably had some other error, then - what you entered is the default translation. That said, inte and ej are synonymous, with the latter being a lot more formal.


Is there a difference between fläskkött and griskött?


No, but we virtually only ever use the former to mean the foodstuff.


The answer came up as "Jag äter kött men ej fläskkött" - do you use 'men ej' interchangeably with 'men inte'? Is one more informal than the other?


Please refer to one of Arnauti's comments above.


Could you say "men fläskkött


No, you need “inte”


My comment got cut short.. it was supposed to say "men fläskkött inte"


"men inte fläskkött"


Why not ingen instead of inte?


In that case you need "inget" since "fläskkött" is a t-word. You would have: "Jag äter kött, men inget fläskkött" = "I eat meat, but no pork". Not exactly the same thing.

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