"Katten min er redd hunder."
Translation:My cat is afraid of dogs.
24 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
"For" is optional. "Å være redd" and "å være redd for" means the same in this context.
Åhh ok, takk, jeg visste ikke det. Are there any rules for determining when 'for' should be used and when not? Or is it entirely optional in every context?
I think it's optional when you have a direct object. If you don't have a direct object you should never use it. You cannot say "Jeg er redd for.", but "Jeg er redd." works. I think it's most common to use "for" before a direct object, so I'm sure Duolingo is just teaching you that it is possible not use it. So it's probably just best to use "for".
That's very interesting, since the "for" (för) is not optional in Swedish!
Indeed. I first learnt Swedish and of course it helps a lot while learning Norwegian but sometimes it is confusing.
1475
Would it still be optional in a more formal context though, such as an academic paper or news article?
Neither is more formal than the other, it's just that one is used more than the other.
If you say "Kattene mine er redde hunder" you won't know whether your cats are scared of dogs or if your cats are scared dogs.
In my case, this is in the opposite with my cat. Should I say 'Katten min er redd ikke hunder?'
For some reason my predictive text came up with "My cat is afraid of Americans"...
Why is there the "er" in there? Shouldn't it just be "katten min redd hunder"?
Just like RED is pronounced in British English. Norwegian R sound is closer to the British R sound than the American R sound; however you better note that they are not exactly similar to each other.
