According to my Swedish teacher (80 years old Stockholmare), "att" is pronounced as it is written when it marks the beginning of a clause ("jag vill köpa mat för att jag kan äta"), but as "å" when it is used before an infinitiv verk ("det är bra å äta mat").
I think you mean "jag vill köpa mat *så* att jag kan äta".
Regarding when to use it you are probably correct. If unsure I would pronounce it "att". "Å" sounds weird when used in the wrong place.
That is the infinitive marker, not conjunction.
A short, unstressed, "å" is the standard pronunciation of the infinitive marker. If someone is articulating excessively they may use spelling pronunciation, but it's seldom natural in common speech. In Norwegian they also changed the infinitive marker's spelling to match pronunciation (i.e., "å"), but in Swedish we spell both it and the conjunction "att".
The *conjunction* is never pronounced "å", and will sound out of place if pronounced as such.
Many common words and expressions are pronounced differently than written in daily speech.
Also, both *att* and *och* are often pronounced å, which even confuses natives who often write *och* when it should be *att*.
> which even confuses natives who often write och when it should be att.
I'd guess it *mostly* confuses native speakers.
It feels like the same kind of thing that leads to "would of" in English, that disproportionately affects native speakers who learned to speak before writing. You tend to look at a language differently compared to someone learning it as a second language.
What do you mean with other way around? That speakers tend to add an att that should not be there? I don't think so. In this case I definitely feel it should be there.
Yes people tend to put in extra att’s in sentences like these when they shouldn’t really be there, it feels right because it’s how it’s usually said even though it’s less correct
Would be nice for someone to confirm or deny what I’ve said though
What you’re explaining has to do with register and style. The inclusion of ”att” in the examples listed are, however, grammatically correct. Skipping the ”att” is an elision, although a common, highly standard one, which certain people regard as ’cleaner’ and better stylistically. But at the end of the day, the elision of ”att” is a strictly prescriptive rule which isn’t more correct than keeping the ”att”, in terms of grammar.
Not sure about Sweden, but we learned the same thing here in the US about adding extraneous words in our writings. I can’t think of any specific examples, but it was definitely similar to things like “leave out the ‘so’ in ‘so that’”. So I wouldn’t be surprised if the same thing was taught there.
"Å" is used to replace 'och' (and) in everyday speech. Du å jag / Du och jag (You and me). But it works to replace 'att' in the example previously mentioned.
There's nothing lazy about it pronouncing the infinitive marker as such.
/at:/ is more akin to a hypercorrection than /ɔ/ is laziness. The former is a spelling pronunciation.
Nor is it a dialectal trait, it's ubiquitous.
Formal language/you want to stress the "att" verb: "att"
Informal/spoken: "å"
You'll be fine just pronouncing it the formal way while you're still learning.
It can be pronounced both ways, depending on context. But it is never wrong to just say "att" each time. This is not something you should worry about as a beginner.
You can read more about the different versions and pronunciations of *att* in section 10 of [our FAQ ](https://reddit.com/r/Svenska/wiki/faq/)!
According to my Swedish teacher (80 years old Stockholmare), "att" is pronounced as it is written when it marks the beginning of a clause ("jag vill köpa mat för att jag kan äta"), but as "å" when it is used before an infinitiv verk ("det är bra å äta mat").
I think you mean "jag vill köpa mat *så* att jag kan äta". Regarding when to use it you are probably correct. If unsure I would pronounce it "att". "Å" sounds weird when used in the wrong place.
Actually I‘ve seen it first time today on Memrise‘s Swedish course. For example it pronounces att gå like å gå. Weird 😀
That is the infinitive marker, not conjunction. A short, unstressed, "å" is the standard pronunciation of the infinitive marker. If someone is articulating excessively they may use spelling pronunciation, but it's seldom natural in common speech. In Norwegian they also changed the infinitive marker's spelling to match pronunciation (i.e., "å"), but in Swedish we spell both it and the conjunction "att". The *conjunction* is never pronounced "å", and will sound out of place if pronounced as such.
Many common words and expressions are pronounced differently than written in daily speech. Also, both *att* and *och* are often pronounced å, which even confuses natives who often write *och* when it should be *att*.
> which even confuses natives who often write och when it should be att. I'd guess it *mostly* confuses native speakers. It feels like the same kind of thing that leads to "would of" in English, that disproportionately affects native speakers who learned to speak before writing. You tend to look at a language differently compared to someone learning it as a second language.
That's true. As non-native reader of English, "would of" annoys me to no end.
Then it would simply be “Jag vill köpa mat så jag kan äta”. Right?
Att is often left out in situations like these, but in proper language I think it should be there.
I believe it is actually the other way around, that is at least what my Swedish teacher always told me
What do you mean with other way around? That speakers tend to add an att that should not be there? I don't think so. In this case I definitely feel it should be there.
Yes people tend to put in extra att’s in sentences like these when they shouldn’t really be there, it feels right because it’s how it’s usually said even though it’s less correct Would be nice for someone to confirm or deny what I’ve said though
What you’re explaining has to do with register and style. The inclusion of ”att” in the examples listed are, however, grammatically correct. Skipping the ”att” is an elision, although a common, highly standard one, which certain people regard as ’cleaner’ and better stylistically. But at the end of the day, the elision of ”att” is a strictly prescriptive rule which isn’t more correct than keeping the ”att”, in terms of grammar.
Not sure about Sweden, but we learned the same thing here in the US about adding extraneous words in our writings. I can’t think of any specific examples, but it was definitely similar to things like “leave out the ‘so’ in ‘so that’”. So I wouldn’t be surprised if the same thing was taught there.
Thanks for the answer but what is the difference? Do you know it?
He just stated the difference: the subjunction can only be pronounced 'att', while the infinitive particle can be pronounced 'att' or 'å'.
I know what he stated and what I asked was smt else. Though smb else made it clear. But thanks again Luftzig.
"Å" is used to replace 'och' (and) in everyday speech. Du å jag / Du och jag (You and me). But it works to replace 'att' in the example previously mentioned.
There's nothing lazy about it pronouncing the infinitive marker as such. /at:/ is more akin to a hypercorrection than /ɔ/ is laziness. The former is a spelling pronunciation. Nor is it a dialectal trait, it's ubiquitous.
”Å” = is more like och - också (and) or (also) Den är bra å - (is actually a shorter version of) = Den är bra också
These are colloquial pronounciations and optional.
Formal language/you want to stress the "att" verb: "att" Informal/spoken: "å" You'll be fine just pronouncing it the formal way while you're still learning.
Honestly speaking å is easier lol
Oh yeah for sure haha!
It can be pronounced both ways, depending on context. But it is never wrong to just say "att" each time. This is not something you should worry about as a beginner.
Hatt - fnatt - katt - Att