Translation:All horses, except for the white one, are black.
I'd make the same translation. However, that would be alla hästarna though, not alla hästar. An insignificant change semantically, but important for beginners to distinguish. Or at least I presume that's the course admin reasoning. :)
I keep getting tripped up on this one because saying "all horses" would seem to indicate every horse in the world. So in essence this sentence says that "every single horse in the world, except for a single white one, are black." But Duo has some weird sentences sometimes so it's hard to tell the intent of this sentence.
I agree. I did this too and I think "all the horses..." should be accepted otherwise it's not logical.
I also agree that the best translation would be "all (of) the horses, except the white one, are black" since we are calling out the "white one" which indicates that we are talking about a known group of horses and not all of the horses in the world and so we would use the definite "the horses" since we are talking about a specific group of horses.
Vita is not only plural, but also the definite form, because it’s ’the white’.
Just a message to my former self.....
For it to be "white ones" it must be "de vita"
....or am I wrong?
What's the difference between the Swedish alla hästar and alla hästarna ? In English the difference is clear and has been explained in another comment, but what about the Swedish pair?
Would this sentence be used to describe a group of horses, or does it really mean that every horse in the entire world is black except for one white horse?
Why is 'one' implied here? The sentence sounds like 'except the white, are black'?
I hope a mod will correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my explanation:
In the Swedish sentence, it is understood that there is one white horse because it says, "den vita." If there was more than one horse, it would have to say, "dem vita."
In the English, the word "one" has to be included because we don't normally leave an adjective hanging there. If we just said, "except the white," there would be a question of "the white what?" Where the Swedish sentence indicates one horse by the use of "den," the English indicates one horse by the use of "one." If it was more than one horse, we would say, "the white ones."
I hope this makes sense.
That's basically it, but you made a minor mistake: It would be "de vita", not "dem vita". "Dem" is the object form, pronounced the same, but spelled differently. To remember it, just switch the "d" out for a "th"; de = the, dem = them. You wouldn't say "them white ones", at least not in standard English.
Actually, by English grammar, “the white ones” is the object of the preposition “except” and would be in the object case, if it were replaced by a pronoun. We would say “except them” and not “except they”.
Swedish grammar may work differently in this regard, as I recall we had “Alla flickor utom jag” and not “ utom mig”. In any case, “dem vita” is definitely wrong for a more fundamental reason. “Dem” is the accusative case of the personal pronoun “de”, but not of the definite article “de”, which remains the same regardless of the syntactic role of the noun phrase.
I did know that it should be "de," but obviously I needed a reminder! :D
I don't think it works to say de = the, dem = them.
Yes, you can replace the "th" with "d," but then you get the wrong word.
de = they
So basically this sentence is saying that "all horses" indicating all horses indefinitely would also be saying that all horses in the world are black except for one white horse. What kind of bizarre, nonsensical, untrue sentence is this?
Does this sentence actually refer to something (a royal procession, a military display, a folk tale perhaps) or is it just an exercise?