# Icelandic: The dog chases the cat



## Alxmrphi

I know this is such a difficult language to learn but it's even harder trying to work out the online Icelandic dictionary (since I don't yet have my own)
but I am trying to create simple sentences, anyway:

Here is the dictionary entry for "to chase":



> 2stökk/va v              (dat)           (            -ti, -t)
> ~~ e-m burt         chase sby away
> 
> ~~ vatni á e-ð      sprinkle water on sth



So if I wanted to say "The dog chases the cat around the field and the cat chases the mouse around the field."

Is this how to say it:

hundurinn stökk kötturinni umhverfis akurinn og kötturin stökk músinni umhverfis akurinn.

What does the /va part after the verb stökk mean in the dictionary quote? I have a feeling the sentence is incorrect but can anyone help me understand where?

Takk fyrir


----------



## butra

If you were chasing something in order to catch it you would not use the verb stökkva. One common verb you could use is elta. 

Your sentence would then be: 

Hundurinn eltir köttinn umhverfis akurinn og kötturinn eltir músina umhverfis akurinn. 

Part of the verb following the slash (/) is subject to changes due to inflectional endings. 

In the dictionary you have those two different verbs (and many more):

1 stökkva intransitive verb. to jump

2 stökkva v (dat) ( -ti, -t) transitive verb. to chase away / to splash (water)


----------



## Alxmrphi

Takk fyrir

Late last night I asked an Icelandic kid about it and he corrected my 'stökk' to 'stökk eftir' and said it sounded better, but if elta is better still, I'll use that! Easier to remember and I don't have to use the dative!

Edit, the edit for "cat/köttur" has this:

 köttur m           (            kattar, kettir)


The dictionary guide says:


 Where the dative singular of a noun has a vowel change, this form  is entered as a headword with a cross-reference.        
  ketti   *->* köttur


So with "stökkva", the word for "cat" should be kettir and not köttur? My god this is confusing, cos it's the dative after stökkva, and therefore that needs to switch, because of a vowel change, I guess my question is, what about "köttur" means that it has to have a vowel change, and hundur and mús don't? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


----------



## butra

The verb elta means to chase or just follow. One can be going fast or slowly. One can be sneaking behind somebody or chasing somebody out or chasing to kill! If you are talking about a dog chasing a cat the dog is very likely chasing the cat out of somewhere. If a cat is chasing a mouse the cat is most likely chasing to kill. 

The verb stökkva means to jump and stökkva eftir is to jump after someone (maybe to jump on someone but not necessarily). In that case you are not going slowly and you are not sneaking. 

In this sentence of yours the verb elta works like polymorphism in computer science. The meaning of the verb jumps out depending on the context.

Even though elta is easy to remember and you don’t have to worry about the dative you are still in deep you know.

The verb elta can be transitive verb like in the case we are dealing with and then it governs the accusative case! 

nom köttur acc kött dat ketti gen kattar.

Regarding the verb stökkva (to jump), it is not a transitive verb and does not need an object and is not responsible for the cat being in dative.

Stökkva eftir is a verb + preposition and the preposition eftir is the culprit!

You can have many combinations of stökkva + preposition like:

Stökkva á + acc Hundur stekkur á kött. A dog jumps at a cat.
Stökkva eftir + dat Hundur stekkur eftir ketti. A dog jumps after a cat.
Stökkva til + gen Hundur stekkur til kattar. A dog jumps towards a cat.


To make this as simple as it is! You must learn to decline the nouns:

nom hundur acc hund dat hundi gen hunds
nom köttur acc kött dat ketti gen kattar
nom mús acc mús dat mús gen músar 

Then you must learn which case is being governed by which preposition and then this is just mathematics!


----------



## Alxmrphi

Finally, an Icelander that understands the difficult terminology of their own language, whenever I mention "declension" or "noun" the people I know (Icelanders) go "Wha?" - so I can never really get a proper explanation.

I suppose learning the irregular nouns and verbs comes with time, and I guess I'll have to give lots of time to learn it.

So köttur and stökkva are both irregular, and this is what is causing problems here?

Ok tonight I'm going to try more grammar lessons and come back with some examples and see if I can learn a bit more!

Thanks for the guidance


----------



## Alxmrphi

The fat dog is opposite the cat - Hundurinn Þybbinn er gagnvart kettinum

?

Opposite = gagnvart (needs dative) so köttur becomes ketti and +num is the dative definite article, and Þybbinn is in the masculine form because "hundur" is masculine?


----------



## butra

How about commenting on my english! I'm learning you know!


----------



## Alxmrphi

I will do if you help me, I only noticed one mistake, in the other thread you said "begin" instead of "began", that's all I've noticed.


----------



## butra

Originally you were trying to use the verb stökkva (to chase away / to splash / transitive verb) which is a weak verb as we call it. It’s not heard very often except in the expressions 
að stökkva einhverjum á flótta or að stökkva vatni á gæs. Stökkva (to jump) on the other hand is a strong verb! It’s very common verb and used in combination with many prepositions.

By the same or similar terminology the declension of the noun köttur is strong. 

I don’t recall having seen the terminology irregular used in connection with declension of Icelandic nouns or conjugation of Icelandic verbs but I’m not a scholar!


----------



## Alxmrphi

I've noticed where we say "irregular" for other languages it seems to correspond to the Icelandic "strong" things, ones that don't follow a pattern.

Like nouns that end in -i are usually masculine (follows a pattern -> weak)
Nouns that end in -a are usually feminine (follows a pattern -> weak)

köttur, is masculine, does it end in an -i, nope! So it is described as 'strong' (irregular) and has a declension that has to be learnt.

With the majority of other things it's simple, nom = normal, just take off the endings for acc, add an "i" for dative and add an "s" for genetive, as you described earlier:



> nom hundur acc hund dat hundi gen hunds



I take it you must see this as a "weak" noun because it follows a pattern, (a lot of other masculine nouns act this way)

But the ones that don't (have declensions that are unconnected) are strong (irregular)

I hope I explained my take on it well.


----------



## butra

The fat dog is opposite the cat - Hundurinn Þybbinn er gagnvart kettinum

This sentence is grammatically correct! But!
Adjectives are usually (most often) in front of the noun and most of them have both a strong and a weak declension. 

Hundurinn þybbinn > Þybbinn hundurinn (strong) > Þybbni hundurinn (weak), witch is more normal for a definite adjective. 
The most common word for fat is feitur so I guess that it’s better to say 
feiti hundurinn.
Gagnvart is not used in this context. We would use andspænis instead.

I say again, I say again I say again, I say again: This sentence is grammatically correct!!!

Is anyone out there who can construct grammatically correct sentence in Icelandic like this?


----------



## Alxmrphi

butra said:


> Hundurinn þybbinn > Þybbinn hundurinn (strong) > Þybbni hundurinn (weak), *which* is more *commonl* for a definite adjective.
> The most common word for fat is feitur so I guess that it’s better to say
> feiti hundurinn.
> Gagnvart is not used in this context. We would use andspænis instead.
> 
> Is *there* anyone out there *that *can construct *a *grammatically correct sentence in Icelandic like this?



What's the rule for changing the adjective from strong/weak, I've never seen this rule before


----------



## butra

Alex_Murphy said:


> What's the rule for changing the adjective from strong/weak, I've never seen this rule before


 
Here follows a simple explanation of when adjectives are declined weak or strong.
This does not cover all details but I hope it will be helpful. An Old English grammar might also be helpful!

An adjective is declined strong as an attribute when describing some indefinite noun and when standing alone as a complement even though it refers to a definite noun.

A good dog. = Góður hundur.
The dog is good = Hundurinn er góður. 

An adjective is declined weak as an attribute when describing a definite noun or in a demonstrative sentence. 

The good dog. = Góði hundurinn.
This good dog. = Þessi góði hundur.


----------



## Alxmrphi

So when you are referring to something in reality, not in a figurative sense you would decline it as weak, but if it's more abstract/hypothetical (indefinite) it's declined as strong

So "ur" is taken off and "i" is added?


----------



## konungursvia

Icelandic is very similar to Old Anglo-Saxon in many respects. Even in English, strong and weak don't mean irregular and regular, but rather, very old cases which resist simiplification, such as past participles: eat ate eaten (strong) bring brought brought (weak, now simplified from bring brought broughten or some such thing).


----------



## Alxmrphi

konungursvia said:


> Icelandic is very similar to Old Anglo-Saxon in many respects. Even in English, strong and weak don't mean irregular and regular, but rather, *very old cases which resist simiplification,* such as past participles: eat ate eaten (strong) bring brought brought (weak, now simplified from bring brought broughten or some such thing).



Just to clarify, this is my definition of irregular, so we are talking about the same thing in my eyes


----------



## butra

Alex_Murphy said:


> So when you are referring to something in reality, not in a figurative sense you would decline it as weak, but if it's more abstract/hypothetical (indefinite) it's declined as strong
> 
> So "ur" is taken off and "i" is added?


 
My use of the words definite and indefinite might be wrong. I have in mind the same terminology as when we talk about the definite and indefinite article. 

A dog is an indefinite dog but the dog is a definite dog and similarly this dog is a definite dog because it’s not just any dog you can think of but some specific dog. So this has nothing to do with real, figurative, abstract or hypothetical dogs.

My apologies!


----------



## Alxmrphi

Absolutely no need to apologise!

I see exactly what you mean, it was what I meant but you phrased it in a better way, so when referring to a specific noun (like dog, one that you know)  the adjective is usually weak, otherwise it's strong?

Is Þetta what you mean


----------



## butra

Alex_Murphy said:


> Is Þetta what you mean


 
Já, þetta er það sem ég á við.


----------

