# Swedish: att du slängt  [supine without auxiliary verb]



## 盲人瞎馬

I've noticed that in written swedish people commonly use the supine without the auxiliary verb and I'm having difficulties understanding how one's supposed to read it.



> Föreställ dig att du *slängt *i dig några julmiddagar efter...



How is this supposed to be read? Att du slängde? Att du har slängt? Att du hade slängt?

Also, does this phenomenon exist in spoken swedish?

Thanks.


----------



## cocuyo

It is uncommon in spoken Swedish, and I usually don't use that mode of expression. It is more common among younger people. "Föreställ dig att du [har] slängt i dig några julmiddagar... "


----------



## MattiasNYC

I agree with cocuyo. But to get the appropriate answer I think you need the rest of the sentence, no?

"Föreställ dig att du *har slängt *i dig några julmiddagar efter..." "och sedan *tar* en löptur på fyra mil..."

"Föreställ dig att du *hade slängt *i dig några julmiddagar efter..." "och sedan *hade *sprungit fyra mil..."

See?


----------



## merryweather

Could it just be lazy texting Swedish? Just leaving stuff out because it can be inferred, or using a "t" ending because it takes less time than writing "de" at the end?

Like, "because internet" and other new things like that in English?

I am really just throwing ideas out without having any knowledge about texting Swedish, but languages do change and move on and maybe this is just the beginning of a new trend.


----------



## cocuyo

It is probably not lazy texting, but rather a formal style that the writer considers correct. It is not entirely new, I have seen it since my youth in the fifties, so I think it is more a matter of style - one that I don't share.


----------



## Sepia

cocuyo said:


> It is probably not lazy texting, but rather a formal style that the writer considers correct. It is not entirely new, I have seen it since my youth in the fifties, so I think it is more a matter of style - one that I don't share.



I also saw it described in grammar books decades ago. Could it even be that it is something that is coming out of use.


----------



## AutumnOwl

cocuyo said:


> It is probably not lazy texting, but rather a formal style that the writer considers correct. It is not entirely new, I have seen it since my youth in the fifties, so I think it is more a matter of style - one that I don't share.


Here is an interesting article about the use of supinum without the auxiliary in the writings of tree Swedish authors: http://www.svensklararforeningen.se/objfiles/1/SvL12nr3Hjalpve_624619571.pdf


----------



## cocuyo

AutumnOwl said:


> Here is an interesting article about the use of supinum without the auxiliary in the writings of tree Swedish authors: http://www.svensklararforeningen.se/objfiles/1/SvL12nr3Hjalpve_624619571.pdf


  As a note to the article, Theodor Kallifatides and I studied at the same school at about the same time, which may be one clue to our coinciding sparse usage of this feature. We had the same teacher. It could be double-checked by parsing the writings of Jan Guillou, who also studied there. Perhaps Anna Wahlgren as well, who was a pupil of the school and also married that teacher and had her first child with him.


----------



## Delfinen

Svenska Akademiens språklära (2003): "I bisatser kan de finita formerna av hjälpverbet _ha _utelämnas - - -Konstruktionen är vanlig i skriftspråk men förekommer även ganska ofta i talspråk." Om du inte vill läsa hela artikeln, som i och för sig var intressant!


----------



## cocuyo

I now have looked through one of Jan Guillou's books, and he uses the supine form without auxiliary verb frequently, almost consistently. From my point of view, this is a formal and somewhat antiquated writing style, while the one that includes auxiliary verb is more relaxed. I have tried to speak it out, but it feels awkward. I have often read for blind people, and when I read a book aloud, I often add the auxiliary verb where I feel it's missing. The lack thereof feels stilted, and at least for me, it does not flow well in spoken Swedish.


----------



## Delfinen

"Jag skulle skrivit till henne, men eftersom jag inte gjort det får jag ringa nu istället." Sounds good to me if I say it. I couldn't say though, just like in the article suggested by AutumnOwl, when I drop the auxiliary and when I don't.


----------



## skandinavien

Interesting thread! I was in a Swedish sociolinguistics course at Uppsala last year and was surprised to learn that the omission of "ha" after att is no longer considered "formal" and exclusive to written texts. On the contrary (as other posters have mentioned), research has shown that it's gaining widespread usage in spoken, colloquial Swedish. It may even become standard someday, or at least that is what forskarna säger!


----------

