Svenska Någon?

[DanTrentfield]

Hej , jag är från Sverige , jag flyttade till USA omkring fyra år sedan , och jag har kämpat för att lära sig och tala engelska så flytande som jag talar mitt modersmål , jag önskar bara engelska var så enkelt som svenska ....

[hypervalent_iodine]

 

Hej , jag är från Sverige , jag flyttade till USA omkring fyra år sedan , och jag har kämpat för att lära sig och tala engelska så flytande som jag talar mitt modersmål , jag önskar bara engelska var så enkelt som svenska ....

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Hello,

 

While we appreciate that SFN has a large international contingent and that it's not always easy to communicate in a second language, we do ask for the sake of simplicity and so that all may participate in a discussion that members write their posts in English.

[Delta1212]

Sorry. I can read Swedish a bit, but I don't speak it at all, so I can't really respond. The best I could manage is et lille dansk, but even then not to the extent that I can carry on a real conversation in it.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Delta1212

[fiveworlds]

Sorry. I can read Swedish a bit, but I don't speak it at all, so I can't really respond.

That's about my best...

 

Hej ,jag är från irland, och jag har kämpat för att lära sig och tala engelska så flytande som jag talar mitt modersmål , jag önskar bara engelska var så enkelt som irländsk ....

[DanTrentfield]

Kul att höra att du är från Irland , är engelska konstigt , speciellt med det grammatik , det tog mig flera år att ens tala grundläggande, brutna engelska , är bara nu kunna tala engelska flytande efter 15 år bor i England , växa upp jag jag fick lära mig svenska som jag föddes i Stockholm , och vi flyttade till Lancaster England när jag var fem, Sedan kom jag till Cornell Univerity när jag var 19 att studera kemi , och jag hoppas att en dag få en doktorsgrad i det och eventuellt undervisa på ett college efter speding tid på fältet.

Edited April 26, 2016 by DanTrentfield

[Sensei]

Since you know both English and Swedish,

how about showing us, especially one who doesn't know Swedish,

in which ways it's easier on some examples.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Sensei

[geordief]

Although it is hard to talk about your own native language I believe it is well known that English is quite a complex language. I believe its vocabulary is high compared to other languages because it has assimilated so many foreign words.

 

I have also heard that there are lots of "exceptions" to the way words are actually pronounced vis a vis how you would expect them to sound based on their spelling.

 

The corollary to this is that other languages are likely to be simpler and more predictable -once you learn the basic rules there are probably fewer surprises down the line.

 

I did learn to speak Norwegian which is quite close to Swedish of course. What I noticed at the time was that the order of words was rather similar to the order of words in English -which was a pleasant change from the Latin languages like French ,Italian and Spanish where words seemed to need to go "back to front".

 

I always felt that Norwegian and English were very close linguistically . Apparently it is the language spoken in Friesland which is supposedly the closest . I think Friesland is an island in The North Sea belonging to Holland whose population migrated to Britain and brought their language over with them.

[StringJunky]

I did learn to speak Norwegian which is quite close to Swedish of course. What I noticed at the time was that the order of words was rather similar to the order of words in English -which was a pleasant change from the Latin languages like French ,Italian and Spanish where words seemed to need to go "back to front".

 

I always felt that Norwegian and English were very close linguistically . Apparently it is the language spoken in Friesland which is supposedly the closest . I think Friesland is an island in The North Sea belonging to Holland whose population migrated to Britain and brought their language over with them.

The east side was frequently invaded by the Scandanavians. In my area - Lincolnshire/Humberside - I read recently that many of the words in that area's dialect are indeed Scandanavian. It makes sense that we speak in a similar sequence.

 

There was a major island - Doggerland and other small ones - until c.5000 BC in the North Sea. The distance wasn't so great for migration or invasions then on that side, as well earlier on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2016 by StringJunky

[John Cuthber]

Do other languages have the equivalent of this?

I take it you already know
of tough and bough and cough and dough?
Others may stumble, but not you
on hiccough, thorough, slough and through.
Well done! And now you wish, perhaps,
To learn of less familiar traps?

Beware of heard, a dreadful word
That looks like beard and sounds like bird.
And dead; it's said like bed, not bead.
For goodness sake, don't call it deed!
Watch out for meat and great and threat,
(They rhyme with suite and straight and debt)

A moth is not a moth in mother,
Nor both in bother, broth in brother.
And here is not a match for there,
Nor dear and fear for bear and pear,
And then there's dose and rose and lose --
Just look them up -- and goose and choose,

And cork and work and card and ward
And font and front and word and sword.
And do and go and thwart and cart --
Come, come, I've hardly made a start.
A dreadful language? Man alive,
I mastered it when I was five.

[geordief]

permettez- moi de rire (lol)

[DanTrentfield]

Since you know both English and Swedish,

how about showing us, especially one who doesn't know Swedish,

in which ways it's easier on some examples.

I can translate my posts so far over to English for you if you like. I'm just so much more used to the grammar structure of Swedish, and although I speak pretty good English, I still don't have as large a vocabulary as I'd like.

[geordief]

Not to show that Swedish is "simpler" than English but this phrase from the OP shows how they work similarly (in my eyes) .

 

"jag önskar bara engelska var så enkelt som svenska " seems to mean "I only wish English was as simple as Swedish" and I notice that the conjunction "that" is missing in both languages.

 

In other words we do not need to say ""I only wish that English was as simple as Swedish" and neither do you need to do so in Swedish.

 

In the Latin languages I am fairly sure you would need that conjunction and maybe also in German (I am guessing) . So that is a similarity I would notice.

 

I cannot say how this rule works in other languages (I believe there are a few)

Edited April 29, 2016 by geordief

[Delta1212]

You can leave it out in German if you want, as well. Still have to drop in a comma and it changes the word order slightly, but you can do it.

[Sensei]

I can translate my posts so far over to English for you if you like.

I can translate what you write by myself using Google, as I did above.

But wanted to know what makes Swedish easier than English. And hoped you have some objective examples.

I thought so you say something else than just "I learned it first, so it's easier for me", as it's too obvious.

Everybody thinks that their native language is easier. Our brain is thinking internally in native language.

When you don't speak, just thinking about something, internal voice is in native language.

 

f.e. any word not existing originally in language has to be adopted to target language. Or new one has to be invented. Easier to adopt existing foreign word. Unless it has bad connotations.

f.e. computer and computers. English word. Just two variations depending on quantity.

We had to adopt it. And it became komputer.

But our language has many variations of single word depending on context. It became:

komputer,komputerom,komputery,komputerowi,komputerowemu,

komputerek,komputerki,komputerkowy,komputerkowi,komputerkowemu,

skomputeryzowany,skomputeryzowanego,skomputeryzowanemu (it translates to English deskill/computerize)

komputerowiec,komputerowcy,komputerowcom,komputerowcowi ("computer expert"/"computer man")

 

I am not good in humanistic and linguistic disputes, even in my own language. Humanistic person would probably easily find >30 variations of this word.

From 2 original English word, there is made dozen of our own language words, and you need to know which word to use depending on context of whole phrase.

 

Scrabble game dictionary had 2.8 millions words and their variations, the last time I checked.

 

I'm just so much more used to the grammar structure of Swedish, and although I speak pretty good English, I still don't have as large a vocabulary as I'd like.

Welcome in club.

In almost every single post I write here I have to open English dictionary, to check words I want to use, just in case..

 

You have to learn "thinking in English". Instead of "I want to tell this (in Swedish, or other)".

Then figure out how to translate, I am since the beginning making phrase in English in brain.

Don't translate, but think in English language since the beginning, while writing.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Sensei

[Delta1212]

I will say, I've found the North Germanic Scandinavian languages to be fairly easy languages generally, but that's coming from the perspective of a native English speaker that also speaks fair German. A lot of Swedish/Norwegian/Danish vocabulary is easy to guess the meaning of with those two languages under your belt, and the sentence structure is generally pretty familiar to a native English speaker.

[DanTrentfield]

I can translate what you write by myself using Google, as I did above.

But wanted to know what makes Swedish easier than English. And hoped you have some objective examples.

I thought so you say something else than just "I learned it first, so it's easier for me", as it's too obvious.

Everybody thinks that their native language is easier. Our brain is thinking internally in native language.

When you don't speak, just thinking about something, internal voice is in native language.

 

f.e. any word not existing originally in language has to be adopted to target language. Or new one has to be invented. Easier to adopt existing foreign word. Unless it has bad connotations.

f.e. computer and computers. English word. Just two variations depending on quantity.

We had to adopt it. And it became komputer.

But our language has many variations of single word depending on context. It became:

komputer,komputerom,komputery,komputerowi,komputerowemu,

komputerek,komputerki,komputerkowy,komputerkowi,komputerkowemu,

skomputeryzowany,skomputeryzowanego,skomputeryzowanemu (it translates to English deskill/computerize)

komputerowiec,komputerowcy,komputerowcom,komputerowcowi ("computer expert"/"computer man")

 

I am not good in humanistic and linguistic disputes, even in my own language. Humanistic person would probably easily find >30 variations of this word.

From 2 original English word, there is made dozen of our own language words, and you need to know which word to use depending on context of whole phrase.

 

Scrabble game dictionary had 2.8 millions words and their variations, the last time I checked.

 

 

Welcome in club.

In almost every single post I write here I have to open English dictionary, to check words I want to use, just in case..

 

You have to learn "thinking in English". Instead of "I want to tell this (in Swedish, or other)".

Then figure out how to translate, I am since the beginning making phrase in English in brain.

Don't translate, but think in English language since the beginning, while writing.

I like Swedish better than English because, as you highlighted it is my native tongue, but what I would like to highlight is that a perspective is a relative thing. I also just like Swedish better than English because it's what I did my first years of school and reading in, and it's what my family spoke for the majority of the time. The other reason why I don't like English as much is because I'm constantly having to check my spellings to produce something that isn't a gargled mess, Like seriously, this is the second time for these sentences I've had to use google to look up spellings.

[StringJunky]

Like seriously, this is the second time for these sentences I've had to use google to look up spellings.

That's because English is a mashup of several languages, so a lot of words follow different spelling rules according to their origins and subsequent manipulation through the various eras. It can't be that bad because it is the de facto language of many areas of the professional, technical and social world... there must be something familiar and useful in it for so many to adopt it. Also it is naturally adaptable to changes in fashion and usage; it's rules are flexible.

 

My hypothesis why English became so strong was because Britain was relatively rich resource-wise but relatively weak militarily; they were easy pickings as a disconnected, motley bunch of tribes. It's population acquired, absorbed and accumulated the genetic, industrial, linguistic and military strengths of the invading cultures. Eventually, the victims became the victors by virtue of being systematically invaded. I think it is a generally accepted fact, to use an analogy, that mongrels are stronger and more adaptable in different environments than pedigrees.

Edited May 4, 2016 by StringJunky

[John Cuthber]

 

Britain was relatively rich resource-wise but relatively weak militarily;

When?

English, as the language we recognise today has been around since, roughly 1200 since which time the "weak" nation bested the Spanish, French and Germans while building an empire that spanned the world.

There's obviously little doubt that the "Vikings" and Norse had a major influence but realistically, we were protected from invasion by the sea to an extent that, for example France , Portugal Spain and so on were not. The Romans came here, discovered that it was cold, wet and hostile then buggered off home again. that's why English doesn't look "Latin". (The Germans and Scandinavians seem to be in much the same position)

Incidentally, how many people who are not from this funny little bunch of islands are aware that the UK has several languages.

How many of you can read this, for example (I openly admit, I can't- I got it from Google)

Ein Tad yn y nefoedd,

sancteiddier dy enw;

deled dy deyrnas;

gwneler dy ewyllys,

ar y ddaear fel yn y nef.

Dyro inni heddiw ein bara beunyddiol,

a maddau inni ein troseddau,

fel yr ym ni wedi maddau i'r rhai a droseddodd yn ein herbyn;

a phaid â'n dwyn i brawf,

ond gwared ni rhag yr Un drwg.

Oherwydd eiddot ti yw'r deyrnas a'r gallu a'r gogoniant am byth.

 

[Sensei]

The Romans came here, discovered that it was cold, wet and hostile then buggered off home again.

 

Quite hilarious comment. Sort of your style.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_conquest_of_Britain

Emperor Claudius, invaded Great Britain, because old pretender to crown of Britain island (or Scottish, or Celtic? if you like) escaped, taking crown together with him, to Rome.

British new lords sent insulting message to emperor Claudius, literally to order him to return crown and regalia.

They had to be insane. If they would sent polite and reasonable message, they would get regalia without a problem...

For insult Claudius, refused to do so, and attacked British island.

 

After capturing lords were not executed, instead taken to Rome, and lived long life, they asked him "why did you attacked us, peasants, when the all shops in Rome city looks (better than) like our country treasury.. ?" (crying)

Edited May 5, 2016 by Sensei

[John Cuthber]

The idea that English has lots of "foreign" words because we were invaded is daft.

A while back a friend and I were trying to think of any language from which English hadn't stolen any words; we couldn't.

I'm not saying no such language exists, but there are words in English from many languages- including those whose native speakers certainly didn't invade us.

Isn't it vastly more likely that we have words from Swahili and Hindi because we invaded their countries?

[Delta1212]

The idea that English has lots of "foreign" words because we were invaded is daft.

A while back a friend and I were trying to think of any language from which English hadn't stolen any words; we couldn't.

I'm not saying no such language exists, but there are words in English from many languages- including those whose native speakers certainly didn't invade us.

Isn't it vastly more likely that we have words from Swahili and Hindi because we invaded their countries?

Well on a basic level, the very heavy preponderance of Norman-French derived words in the English language are certainly the result of an invasion. That easily makes up the bulk of "foreign" vocabulary in English.

 

Some North Germanic vocabulary and grammar likely made its way into the language from Scandinavia for somewhat similar reasons.

 

Denying that is silly, but of course it's not the sole reason for English having loan words and borrowings from other languages. It is the reason that English vocabulary is much more of a mix of Romance and Germanic than other European languages, though.

[John Cuthber]

It is the reason that English vocabulary is much more of a mix of Romance and Germanic than other European languages, though.

Indeed, but French is almost entirely Latin based. Prior to the Roman invasion there would have been lots of tribal languages and all of them were largely replaced.

So, by comparison, English has done rather better than. for example, France and Spain who essentially lost their earlier languages.

The Breton bits of France, for example would have had a language rather closer to the Welsh I posted earlier.

There's also the observation that quite a lot of ideas have two words in English, the original and one derived from Norman French.

The usual examples cited are the cows, pigs and sheep that, after slaughter, are presented as beef, pork and mutton.

The farmers were still using the older English terms, but the cooks who had to present the food to their new Norman lords used Norman terms for the same thing.

 

The real difficulty with saying that English is a mixed up language because we have been invaded a lot because of military weakness is that, since England came into existence (about the 10th C), we have only been invaded once, by the Normans. (Obviously the Vikings popped in for a cup of tea from time to time as well; quite a few of them settled)

So, the whole development of English, since that time can not have been brought about by invaders.

At that time, English looked like this.

Forrþrihht anan se time comm

þatt ure Drihhtin wollde

ben borenn i þiss middellærd

forr all mannkinne nede

he chæs himm sone kinnessmenn

all swillke summ he wollde

and whær he wollde borenn ben

he chæs all att hiss wille

 

It doesn't look like that any more, and the difference can't be invasion.

A lot of changes came about via settlement- notably by the Vikings) but that's not a military thing.

[StringJunky]

Indeed, but French is almost entirely Latin based. Prior to the Roman invasion there would have been lots of tribal languages and all of them were largely replaced.

So, by comparison, English has done rather better than. for example, France and Spain who essentially lost their earlier languages.

The Breton bits of France, for example would have had a language rather closer to the Welsh I posted earlier.

There's also the observation that quite a lot of ideas have two words in English, the original and one derived from Norman French.

The usual examples cited are the cows, pigs and sheep that, after slaughter, are presented as beef, pork and mutton.

The farmers were still using the older English terms, but the cooks who had to present the food to their new Norman lords used Norman terms for the same thing.

 

The real difficulty with saying that English is a mixed up language because we have been invaded a lot because of military weakness is that, since England came into existence (about the 10th C), we have only been invaded once, by the Normans. (Obviously the Vikings popped in for a cup of tea from time to time as well; quite a few of them settled)

So, the whole development of English, since that time can not have been brought about by invaders.

At that time, English looked like this.

Forrþrihht anan se time comm

þatt ure Drihhtin wollde

ben borenn i þiss middellærd

forr all mannkinne nede

he chæs himm sone kinnessmenn

all swillke summ he wollde

and whær he wollde borenn ben

he chæs all att hiss wille

 

It doesn't look like that any more, and the difference can't be invasion.

A lot of changes came about via settlement- notably by the Vikings) but that's not a military thing.

I concede to your point JC on the language side. I was actually thinking much earlier than that also along the lines of genetic influences that comes with rape and pillage.