"Fördelarna är fler än nackdelarna."

Translation:There are more advantages than disadvantages.

March 17, 2015

This discussion is locked.


In my mind 'the advantages are greater than the disadvantages' sounds like a more natural sentence. Would the translation of that use a different word than 'fler'?


Yes, we'd likely use större, to reflect the change from countable to uncountable.


Jag skrev "The advantages outweigh the disadvantages"


That sentence is fine, but not accepted. It'd rather translate to "fördelarna väger tyngre än nackdelarna".


In English, Gav-ol's version would be the most natural way to say this, IMO, unless there was an actual list and the 'ads' numbered greater than the 'disads'. Then I'd say 'outnumbered'.

I do understand we're here for Swedish, and that other answers are closer to the language we're translating from.

That said, it's nice to see Zmrzlina's suggestion of a preferable translation, thank you. :-)


Another very natural Swedish way of saying what you want to express is just Fördelarna överväger. I agree with Zmrzlina though that what you want to say is something different from what the Swedish sentence here says. Keep in mind that this Swedish sentence is just a sentence – it is not a set phrase. It really doesn't mean that the advantages are more important than the disadvantages – only that there's a larger number of them.


Just leaving this here: As devalanteriel wrote earlier in another discussion (https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/7756693) fördel is derived from "the first - and better - part of something you split in two" (för + del)

With regard to this, in nackdel "nack(e)" actually means neck/back of the head/scruff. Although, I have not found any source for is exact etymology so far.

I hope it helps others.

  • 1241

The swedish wiktionary gives an etymology which puts it as a borrowing from german, roughly translated as back part.


compare to german: 'die Vorteile sind mehr als die Nachteile'


I don't think we would say it like that in German, but i guess the point was the similarity of the words.


Why is flera wrong here?


Since you're asking in this sentence forum, did you get it as a listen and type exercise?


I cannot remember. But because fördelarna is plural, I thought that it should be flera? But maybe I am messing up things.


This sentence is supposed to be translated from Swedish into English, so if you got it as a listen and type exercise, the answer is simply that you have to type what the voice actually said.

On the reverse sentence, flera is an accepted answer, but it's not the best one. In principle, fler means 'more numerous' for countable things (as in 'there are more X than Y') and flera means 'several' (Jag har flera katter 'I have several cats' but jag har fler katter än du 'I have more cats than you) but especially in the spoken language we tend to use flera for both.


It would sound pretty natural to me at least /native


I believe "The disadvantages are more than the disadvantages" is a better translation than the one I was supposed to make out of given words: "There are more advantages than disadvantages." Since there was no "the," I chose "advantages are more than disadvantages.

If it's supposed to be "There are more advantages than disadvantages," why wouldn't the Swedish be "Det finns fler fördelar än nackdelar"? In other words, I think this translation is wrong and should be changed. :/


We do accept "The advantages are more than the disadvantages", but you wrote "disadvantages" twice.


Is "outnumber" a good translation of vara fler än?


Sure! We don't really have a direct verb equivalent for "outnumber", so that's fine.




Yes, that is also accepted.


"the advantages are more than disadvantages" could someone please explain why this is wrong


You're missing the second "the".

[deactivated user]

    When do we use mer versus fler?


    mer is for mass nouns, and fler for countable nouns.


    I haven't tried that answer so i don't know if it is accepted, but would "the advantages are more numerous than the disadvantages" be accepted? Because it feels more natural than more on its own.


    It's a fine translation, whether accepted or not. :)


    Why not "inconvenients"?


    That's not really a word in English. I mean, it is, but it's an archaic word that meant something else.


    The advantages exceed the disadvantages.?


    Sure, why not. I'll add that. :)


    I wrote - There are advantages more than disadvantages. I think that that should be accepted.


    Hm, why "the disadvantages are more then the advantages" is wrong?


    The advantages are more than the disadvantages. The real English.

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