# Icelandic: it's cold today



## Silver_Biscuit

Hæ öll,

Þessi er frekar einföld spurning. Ef talað er um hitastigið á íslensku (hvað varðar veðrið), hvort fornafn ætti maður að nota?
Ég hef séð báðar þessara setningargerða:

*Hann *er* kaldur* í dag.
*Það* er *kalt* í dag.

Ég geri ráð fyrir því að 'hann' sé í staðinn fyrir 'dagurinn', og 'það' sé bara gervifrumlag eins og í setningunni 'það er rigning'. En hvort er rétt að segja?

Takk.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Það virðist að það var notað líka á norrænu, horfðu á hérna...


----------



## Silver_Biscuit

Alxmrphi said:


> Það virðist að það var notað líka á norrænu, horfðu á hérna...


 
Aha. So, '*hann* er *kaldur* í dag' is correct Icelandic. But is the other sentence incorrect?


----------



## Alxmrphi

Silver_Biscuit said:


> Aha. So, '*hann* er *kaldur* í dag' is correct Icelandic. But is the other sentence incorrect?


I don't think so, I've seen it used a few times as well, it's very typical for a Germanic language to have the version for* it* as its null-subject (dummy) pronoun.
When I was looking for an answer to your question I came across it a few times, like this woman talking about her children:


> Mér reyndar dettur ekki í hug að setja þau dúðuð í bílinn og í útifötum,  finnst sjálfti mjög óþægilegt að vera dúðuð í bíl og í bílbelti. Eldra  barnið er í flíspeysu í bílnum og yngra í ruskovilla galla ef *það er  kalt (weather)*og ég hita bílinn ef *hann er kaldur* *(the child)*.


----------



## Silver_Biscuit

Hmm, searching on google for "hann er kaldur í dag" produces _far_ fewer results than "það er kalt í dag",* so I would guess that the former is less frequently used, although both are correct? Perhaps there is a difference in formality, or using 'hann' might be old-fashioned.
Maybe a native speaker can confirm, refute or elaborate on these theories.

* I included 'í dag' to ensure results were mainly weather-related.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Silver_Biscuit said:


> Hmm, searching on google for "hann er kaldur í dag" produces _far_ fewer results than "það er kalt í dag", so I would guess that the former is less frequently used, although both are correct? Perhaps there is a difference in formality, or using 'hann' might be old-fashioned.
> Maybe a native speaker can confirm, refute or elaborate on these theories.



Ring the Sindri bell!


----------



## sindridah

HEYY! , það er kalt í dag is much more common, the most popular phrases is "það er skítkalt/kalt í dag" or just "það er skítaveður í dag"


----------



## sindridah

hei alex or silfur_kexkaka hope i may add a question to this forum  , but in english, is it wrong to ask if i "can" instead of "may", i'm i then questioning my physical ability to do it?


----------



## sindridah

hey alex or silfur_kexkaka , hope i may ask a question to this forum, but if i use "can" instead of "may" in english in a question, am i then questioning my physical ability to do it?


----------



## Gavril

Silver_Biscuit said:


> Ég geri ráð fyrir því að 'hann' sé í staðinn fyrir 'dagurinn',



Tangentially, is it correct to put '_dagurinn' _in the nominative (rather than accusative) after _fyrir _in this context?


----------



## sindridah

Gavril said:


> Tangentially, is it correct to put '_dagurinn' _in the nominative (rather than accusative) after _fyrir _in this context?


 
Yes, you are right Gavril, "hann sé í staðinn fyrir daginn" is it suppose to be.


----------



## Silver_Biscuit

I know it ought to be in the accusative if it was part of the sentence, but I thought that since the word was in quotation marks it should be in the same form as in the hypothetical sentence that I was 'quoting', i.e. 'Dagurinn er kaldur í dag'.
You can certainly make ungrammatical sentences in English that are perfectly OK because of quotation marks. For example:

The dress did not suit her. 'Her' is, of course, Sarah.

The second sentence ought to start with 'she', but the word doesn't change its form because it's being quoted. Anyway, that's why I did it - maybe Icelandic punctuation is different.

Edit: Just thought of a better way to put it: I was talking about the _word_ 'dagurinn', not the actual day.


----------



## Gavril

Silver_Biscuit said:


> I know it ought to be in the accusative if it was part of the sentence, but I thought that since the word was in quotation marks it should be in the same form as in the hypothetical sentence that I was 'quoting', i.e. 'Dagurinn er kaldur í dag'.
> You can certainly make ungrammatical sentences in English that are perfectly OK because of quotation marks. For example:
> 
> The dress did not suit her. 'Her' is, of course, Sarah.
> 
> The second sentence ought to start with 'she', but the word doesn't change its form because it's being quoted. Anyway, that's why I did it - maybe Icelandic punctuation is different.
> 
> Edit: Just thought of a better way to put it: I was talking about the _word_ 'dagurinn', not the actual day.



Exactly, I was just wondering if Icelandic prefers _fyrir 'daginn' _or _fyrir 'dagurinn'_ in this context (or either, depending on the speaker/writer).


----------

