Re: Odd construct

>
>Andreas skrev:
>
> > That is, when it's not cliticized (if that's a word) to a
> > [-t] that attaches to the preceeding word. Eg _slå't_ "hit it"
> > (imperative), "se på't_ "look at it".
>
>Ha! What kind of old rural dialect is that? :) Don't you
>say _slå ren_ and _se på ren_?
You can't honestly mean that you say _slå ren_ for standard written _slå
det_?!?

In my 'lect, I've got _slå det_>_slå't_, _slå den_>_slå'n_. I assume you'd
say _slå ren_ for the later, but surely you don't have anything involving an
/n/ for the former? Some people'd say _slå re_ - perhaps you too?

As for "old rural dialect", I certainly don't speak any "genuine" dialect,
having grown up in places spread all over southern Sweden. I'd think my
speech is more Standard Swedish than most peoples'.

                                                    Andreas

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Reply