# Swedish: Answer "Jo,".



## applefarm

Hi,
This sentence has negotiation in the question, and therefore the answer doesn't use Ja/Nej, but uses Jo:

"Ligger inte Stockholm i Sverige? -Jo, det gör det."


But is that answer also correct then:

"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Jo, det gör det inte."

Here the overall question requires answer True/Yes, because Stocholm really does not locate in Finalnd. 
So, can here be answered this way too:

"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det inte."
or evenso maybe:
"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det."


----------



## erip

I haven't studied long, but from what I understand, you would say 

"Ja, det gör det inte." or "Jo, det gör det inte."

Much like English (of which I assume you have a good grasp), we would say (approximately) "Stockholm isn't in Finland, right?", to which we would respond "Right, it's not."

Hope this helped!


----------



## applefarm

So, can some Swed approve that this is correct way to answer:

"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Jo, det gör det inte."


----------



## myšlenka

applefarm said:


> *(1)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Jo, det gör det inte."
> *(2)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det inte."
> *(3)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det."


If Swedish works the same way as Norwegian, French and German, then these are wrong. The crucial point is that _jo_ is used to show that you disagree with the speaker when the speaker's statement is negative.* In (1), the person who answers does not disagree with the speaker so _jo_ cannot be used. In (2) and (3), the statement is negative, rendering _ja_ illicit in this context.

_Ja_ - used to answer positive questions in a positive way.
_Jo_ - used to answer negative questions in a positive way.
_Nej_ - used to answer questions in general in a negative way.


----------



## applefarm

So, as i understand the answer for this question does not include disagreement:

 "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland?"

Because there is nothing to disagree about- the question's claim is correct. So here we cannot answer with "Jo, ", right?
We can only use Ja/Nej in answer. Is that correct way to answer:

 "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det inte."

?


----------



## myšlenka

applefarm said:


> "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland?"
> 
> Because there is nothing to disagree about- the question's claim is correct. So here we cannot answer with "Jo, ", right?
> We can only use Ja/Nej in answer. Is that correct way to answer:
> 
> "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det inte."
> 
> ?


It doesn't matter if the question's claim is correct or not. The distribution of ja/jo/nej is based on syntactic criteria.
 "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland?" is a negative question so to answer that this is indeed the case (a positive answer) you have to use _jo_. If you want to say that this is not the case (a negative answer), you have to use _nej_.

"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? - Jo, det gör det."
"Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? - Nej, det gör det inte."


----------



## applefarm

Thanks, i theoretically understand now.

So, are those all correct:

Håller du med? / Do you agree? -Ja, det gör jag. / Yes, i agree.
Håller du med? / Do you agree? -Nej, det gör jag inte. / No, i don't agree.
Håller du inte med? / Don't you agree? -Jo, det gör jag. / Actually, i agree.
Håller du inte med? / Don't you agree? -Nej, det gör jag inte. / Correct, i really don't agree.

?


----------



## myšlenka

Exactly


----------



## Ogago

Appelfarm's examples are totally correct.

But they are not obvious for all Swedish speakers. So when I answer a question of this kind I often answer with a full sentence to clarify:
Håller du inte med? Jovisst, håller jag med.
Håller du inte med? Nej, jag håller inte alls med.
I seldom anwser with only a Ja, Jo, or Nej.


----------



## Lugubert

myšlenka said:


> Originally Posted by *applefarm*
> 
> 
> *(1)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Jo, det gör det inte."
> *(2)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det inte."
> *(3)* "Ligger inte Stockholm i Finland? -Ja, det gör det."
> 
> If Swedish works the same way as Norwegian, French and German, then these are wrong. The crucial point is that _jo_ is used to show that you disagree with the speaker when the speaker's statement is negative.* In (1), the person who answers does not disagree with the speaker so _jo_ cannot be used. In (2) and (3), the statement is negative, rendering _ja_ illicit in this context.
> 
> _Ja_ - used to answer positive questions in a positive way.
> _Jo_ - used to answer negative questions in a positive way.
> _Nej_ - used to answer questions in general in a negative way.


Summarized: the only possible answer to 1 through 3 is "Nej, det gör det inte."



applefarm said:


> Thanks, i theoretically understand now.
> 
> So, are those all correct:
> 
> Håller du med? / Do you agree? -Ja, det gör jag. / Yes, i agree.
> Håller du med? / Do you agree? -Nej, det gör jag inte. / No, i don't agree.
> Håller du inte med? / Don't you agree? -Jo, det gör jag. / Actually, i agree.
> Håller du inte med? / Don't you agree? -Nej, det gör jag inte. / Correct, i really don't agree.


Well done! Variations 1-4:
Ja. / I (sure) do.
No / (I don't).
Jo.
Nej.

A possible complication: In Gotland, like in some from me far away languages, I think that some usages are reversed:

Håller du inte med? / Don't you agree? - *Jo* (det gör jag inte [agreeing with the negative]). / Sure, i really don't agree.


----------

