I'd say that would be a better translation for 'will'. 'vil' would most often translate to 'want' in sentences like this.
If you're stopping right at the moment you were saying it, it could work, but then it wouldn't mean quite the same thing. It's far from as common as 'slutte å'.
That'd translate to "I am going to quit eating meat", which totally works in Norwegian
Would 'Jeg vil stanse å spise kjøtt.' also be a valid translation? In any case, could somebody enlighten me on the difference between å stanse and å slutte?
Å stanse is more temporary than å slutte.
Å slutte means to quit (quit a job/quit smoking), or to finish (finish work for the day, finish your homework, etc.)
Å stanse is more along the lines of coming to a stop, for example, stopping at a stop sign long enough to make sure it's safe to continue, or stopping to look at an exhibit in a museum before moving on to the next.
"I will stop to eat meat," means you will stop what you're doing in order to eat meat. On the other hand, "I will quit (stop) eating meat," means you intend to never again eat meat.
Yes. I put, "I will cease to eat meat," but was gonged wrong, despite more accurately using the infinitive form of the original. Comment: In general I feel these courses are very Americentric in the forms of English employed. Also, they often insist on American forms of expression even at the expense of accuracy...(something I find to be pretty poor show, don't you know?!)
who are we to say England is the driving force of English?? Might be India really! Anyway, Norwegians love American language too ...maybe more than our 'correct' style. They certainly love "country music " !
My main complaint is a lack of accuracy in translation. These are supposed to be language courses, after all, where meanings matter. That DL should so rigidly insist on what are, to some degree, "wrong" translations, without even the option of selecting one that's more correct grammatically (as here) or closer in sense (also happening here) is genuinely irksome. That is something I would wish to be fixed. More options would do it, then everybody could be happy. This is not elitism... this is just a matter of NOT getting it wrong.
However, I will say that the fact that I can be critical in this way, indicates how much I have learned about language, not least the differences between British and American dialects of English, which are bigger than I previously realised.... This leaves aside how much I have learned about Norwegian/French/Esperanto.
The purpose of my note is not to be harsh but is to remind you of an old adage, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
I am Norwegian. I grew up speaking Norwegian and English. I attended university in Norway and North America and I have a degree in Applied Linguistics, As a result, I am a bit more familiar with the nuances of Norwegian grammar than many Norwegians and am almost certainly more proficient than virtually all second language learners.
I have read your arguments, both above and in other commentaries, regarding grammatically correct options and find those arguments to be fundamentally flawed. There are aspects of the language in respect to which you don't yet have a correct understanding.
DL's translations are not perfect but because you have not yet achieved the level of proficiency required to critically and accurately assess grammar usage and/ or translations your remarks are inaccurate.
Attaining native like competency would, for all second language learners, be extremely time consuming and for most of them it would never be attained.
YOur comment seems perfectly acceptable and so ignore those who down voted you.But Mr F11 you must be aware by now that learning a language is a lifelong task. And in many ways actually impossible in true native terms unless born into it. The subtle nuances and differences of interpretation are simple gigantic. And we are stuck in a time warp of our own lifetime and experience. Jokes, terms, sayings, words and usage change and refuse to be formalised. Those who set up the tree are, I think, not always native speakers and though pretty faultless in most ways, are not us Brits with our history and lifetime's experience. Translation, true translation is, in fact, in a real sense actually impossible. I myself came to it aged 12 thinking each word had a foreign cognate and it was just a matter of substitution. Later I came to see that it was more than that. But now faced with linguistic and cultural expanses I realise its tougher than can be imagined. More directly "to cease" is rather school-marmy wouldnt you say? Cease that now! I ceased going to football in 1959. ... If 'å slutte' is used everywhere and often in Norway ( and I dont know if thats true) then perhaps "stopped" might be better. There is also "relinquished " "abandoned" and "renounced" or "have forgone ". Words you know of, but I doubt if all of the non-local high flyers will totally know.