# Swedish: Turning verbs into nouns



## 3Nex

From *att kasta*, you can make *ett kast*, *ett kastande *and *en kastning*. 
From *att spela*, you can make *ett spel*, *ett spelande *and *en spelning*. 
From *att hoppa*, you can make *ett hopp*, *ett hoppande *and *en hoppning*. 

But what are the specific differences between all of them?

And are the rules of meanings predictable for every verb that i would turn into a noun this way? 

I am using tyda.se for translating and it has entries for most of the verbs i've tried so far, but it doesn't have one for* ett simm*. It has *ett simmande* and *en simning*. How come there is no *ett simm*? How would i say "I'm going for a swim"?


----------



## AutumnOwl

3Nex said:


> but it doesn't have one for* ett simm*. It has *ett simmande* and *en simning*. How come there is no *ett simm*? How would i say "I'm going for a swim"?


The word is _ett sim_ (not simm), but it's usually used in combined words, for example _ett simtag_ - a (swim) stroke, _en simhall_ - a baths, an (indoor) pool, _simbyxor_ - (swimming) trunks. 

As for "I'm going for a swim" - _jag ska gå och simma, jag ska (gå och) ta mig ett dopp, jag ska gå och bada_ are some alternatives.


----------



## Tjahzi

Sadly, there are no exact rules governing the formation of verbal nouns, however, there are patterns regarding their usages. I will give a brief summary below listing the three types you presented above. 

The first category could be regarded as a "pure" form, in fact it's sometimes ambiguous whether the noun stems from the verb or the other way around. As such, the meaning of the noun might vary, but in general, it can be categorized as the product or outcome of the verb. Do note that the forms are not always as obviously connected as the ones you have presented above, examples of the contrary include _sjunga-sång, vinna-vinst, leva-liv._

The second category are present participles/verbal nouns. These are used to refer to the act or process of preforming the verb, similarly to English. 

The last category, formed through the addition of the suffix _-ning_, tends to refer to events pertaining to the verb in question. As such, these forms might seem similar to the participles but differ in that while the participles exist as forms that can be formed from the verb, the forms formed with an _-ning_ suffix are grammaticalized nouns that don't exist for all verbs and of which some have meanings that are are ambiguous or don't fully match that of their corresponding verb. For instance, _spelning_ refers to _concert_ (from _spela musik_) and _hoppning_ to animal show jumping (normally horses) events.


To sum up, this is a complicated subject and sadly, you can rarely predict the meaning of a specific form (excluding the first category) beforehand. Consider the second category as something you might encounter but have no need for emplying yourself while the third category consists of seemingly randomly selected nouns with various usages that have to be learnt individually. 

Feel free to ask for further clarifications!


----------



## 3Nex

Thank you so much for your response. You also responded to one of my previous questions with just as much detail and clarity. It's a real pleasure to get such a well-formed answer. Do you study languages by any chance? 

So having all of that in mind, let me try to solve an example. You and me go to the park now to throw some frisbee. 


To say that my throw was good would be _Bra kast_
To say that the throwing went well, as in i didn't injure myself would by _Kastande gick bra_
And then _kastning_, as you said, would be something with an unpredictable meaning, but related to throwing in some way; for example a dart-throwing competition or something along those lines.
Is that right, did i understand correctly?


----------



## Tjahzi

Thanks, you're welcome. I like to consider myself a linguaphile with a particular interest in morphology and phonology. 

Regarding your examples:


3Nex said:


> To say that my throw was good would be _Bra kast_


Yes, exactly.





3Nex said:


> To say that the throwing went well, as in i didn't injure myself would by _Kastande gick bra_


Yes, sort of. While this usage is rare in everyday language, athletes like discus/javelin throwers or judokas may refer to the throwing element of their sports with _kastandet_. (Do note the definite form.)





3Nex said:


> And then _kastning_, as you said, would be something with an unpredictable meaning, but related to throwing in some way; for example a dart-throwing competition or something along those lines.


Well, consider this form a word that might exist, or might not, and if it does, its meaning might be related to various degree. For example, _kastning_ doesn't seem to mean anything for me, but I made a goolge search and apparently it is used to refer to premature abortion by animals.


----------



## 3Nex

Tjahzi said:


> (Do note the definite form.)


Ah... Having trouble getting used to that.. 



Tjahzi said:


> apparently it is used to refer to premature abortion by animals


Close enough  

I hope you don't mind if I ask you one more thing. Do you, by any chance, know if there is any historical (or any for that matter) reason for different meanings in words that share the same root? For example, if _att rädda_ means to save, why doesn't _rädd_ mean secure/safe/saved? By my logic at least, _rädd_ actually means what _orädd_ *should* mean...


----------



## Tjahzi

Well, of course, although they are different for each case. I assume _kast(a) _was sometimes during history used to refer to delivery, there is a motion, an agent and an object after all. As for_(o)rädd_, I'm afraid I don't follow really, and sadly, neother do I know why things turned out the way they did. All in all, it's not very different from how all words change meaning over time though.


----------



## myšlenka

3Nex said:


> For example, if _att rädda_ means to save, why doesn't _rädd_ mean secure/safe/saved? By my logic at least, _rädd_ actually means what _orädd_ *should* mean...


The reason is that they historically come from _different_ roots.


----------



## 3Nex

myšlenka said:


> The reason is that they historically come from _different_ roots.



Oh... Well that explains some stuff! 

Thanks dudes.


----------

