Swedish Language Blog

Compared to most countries, Sweden is very small, at least in terms of population. Despite that, from the greatly dominant forests of this land have come numerous inventions and developments: from dynamite and the pacemaker to ABBA and IKEA. Several famous scientists that have contributed immensely to the world of science also come from Sweden; for example, Carl von Linné (Carl Linnaeus), Anders Celsius, and Anders Ångström.

So now the question is this: Is Sweden really such a small country? I guess that’s for everyone to decided for her-/himself. But whether it is or not, if you’re going to live in this outstandingly progressive country, you need to know how to say ‘large’ and ‘small’ in Swedish, and how to use these words properly.

The Swedish word for ‘large’ is stor. It is an adjective that is conjugated as follows:

En stor hund – A large dog
Ett stort hus – A large house
Flera stora hundar – Several large dogs
Flera stora hus – Several large houses
Den stora hunden – The large dog
Det stora huset – The large house
De stora hundarna – The large dogs
De stora husen – The large houses

As you can see, in singular (one large dog or one large house),  stor can be conjugated in three ways: stor, stort, and stora. Which conjugation you choose depends on these factors:

Gender (utrum [en words] and neutrum [ett words])
Number (one or more than one)

Adjectives that describe utrum nouns and ones that describe neutrum nouns are conjugated differently in singular indefinite:

En stor hund – A large dog (utrum, singular, indefinite)
Ett stort hus – A large house (neutrum, singular, indefinite)

but the same in plural indefinite:

Flera stora hundar – Several large dogs (utrum, plural, indefinite)
Flera stora hus – Several large houses (neutrum, plural, indefinite)

They are also conjugated the same in both singular and plural definite form in 99.∞% of cases:

Den stora hunden – The large dog (utrum, singular, definite)
Det stora huset – The large house (neutrum, singular, definite)
De stora hundarna – The large dogs (utrum, plural, definite)
De stora husen – The large houses (neutrum, plural, definite)

As you can see, the only time that adjectives are conjugated differently depending on the gender of the noun they describe is in singular indefinite form. Otherwise, stor is always conjugated stora.

In the case of liten (‘small’), however, things are different. It is the only common adjective that has truly special conjugations. I will use the same examples, in the same order, to show why liten is so special:

En liten hund – A small dog (utrum, singular, indefinite)
Ett litet hus – A small house (neutrum, singular, indefinite)
Flera små hundar – Several small dogs (utrum, plural, indefinite)
Flera små hus – Several small houses (neutrum, plural, indefinite)
Den lilla hunden – The small dog (utrum, singular, definite)
Det lilla huset – The small house (neutrum, singular, definite)
De små hundarna – The small dogs (utrum, plural, definite)
De små husen – The small houses (neutrum, plural, definite)

Unlike the remaining 99.∞% of adjectives, liten has a special conjugation for the singular definite form that differs from the plural definite and indefinite forms, namely lilla. This is a very important for people who are learning Swedish as a second or foreign language; first, you think that the plural definite form should take on the conjugation of the singular definite form, but then it feels weird not using the plural små. Then you feel that små doesn’t sound definite and the correct conjugation is lilla. Or at least that’s how it was for me. But now it’s clear to everyone that all plural conjugations of liten are små.

This may seem complicated, but don’t let it discourage you! This kind of thing is easy to master with just a little practice. As I’ve suggested before, try keeping a journal or blog and practice writing sentences and phrases, keeping an eye on your grammar. The more you do it, the less you’ll have to think about it, and suddenly it’s very easy. Good luck!

I’m working on a degree in Scandinavian Studies and have recently found myself reading and listening to a lot of things about the Kensington Stone. In fact, I just recently heard a talk by Anders Lundt Hansen, a Danish historian and NGO worker, discussing the stone and was inspired to do a quick write-up. The Kensington Stone, depending on who you ask, it is proof that Scandinavians managed to make their way deep into what is now the United States long before any other European group, or it is simply a hoax. An impressive one, but a hoax nonetheless.

The Kensington Stone is a rune stone that was found in 1898 in rural Minnesota by a farmer named Olof Ohlman. It is a huge stone slab that has runic inscriptions explaining that a group of 30 Scandinavian explorers were in the area in 1362. The stone explains a little bit more about what happened to the explorers (ten died for example), but does not tell us exactly who wrote this stone.

So what’s the big deal? It’s pretty well documented that Scandinavians did make it to North America during the Viking Age. But the Viking Age ended around 1066. This was 1362. Still quite some time before Columbus sailed the ocean blue. This gives some sort of claim to Scandinavian Americans that their ancestors in one form or another were here first. For better or worse.

The big deal though is that the stone, as the vast majority of people and scholars will tell you, is a fake. There are plenty of reasons to think so. A few things are especially interesting. Linguistics is one of them. Once you transcribe the runic letters to Latin letters, you’ll probably be able to read what the text says. That’s problematic because the language that was used in the 1300s was not the same that was used in the 1800s when the stone was discovered. Unfortunately, the language that is used on the stone is quite similar to 19^th century Swedish. Not only that, but the runes themselves do not match up with what you would expect from the 1300s. They do however closely mirror the runes created on a note by Edward Larsson back in 1883 in northern Sweden. There is a host of other evidence suggesting it is a hoax (the style of writing, the words used, etc.), but the evidence is pretty conclusive.

I mentioned above that the stone does not mention who carved it. And that is interesting. Most rune stones that have survived include the name of the person who has carved the stone, however, it does not usually include the date. We see the exact opposite in the Kensington Stone.

So yeah, the stone is a fake. It wouldn’t be the first time something like this happened. Regardless though, it is an interesting artifact because it is a fake. It has become a sort of celebrity (as much as a stone can become a celebrity) in the Midwest and with Scandinavian Americans because it represents something. A Scandinavian-American identity that was being formed, and is still being formed today.

But what do you think? Have you heard of the stone? Does it matter that it is fake?

Since it is Easter right now we better just talk about all the Easter traditions all at once. The Påskägg (Easter egg) is very central in Swedes celebrating Easter. Almost everybody gets one, though the way in which the receive it is quite different.

Some find their eggs filled with candy on the kitchen table or in the living room. Though I have heard stories about some having to look for their egg all around the house or even outside. Others get their Easter egg stuffed under their pillow.

In recent years the Easter egg doesn’t only contain candy, children get toys or other small nicknacks as well.

As well as the Easter egg there is one other food related event, almost identical to the Julbord (christmas feast). If you ask almost anybody they will tell you that the Julbord and the Påskbord are pretty much the same except for the fact that the Påskbord has eggs on it and might be slightly less heavy. The Julmust is substituted with a yellow label and called Påskmust. It is a great time to be social and people enjoy the company of family or friends over lovely buffets.