I’m only on level 94 or so myself so I didn’t get a chance to notice those issues yet. I’ve just fixed them.
1 Like
I had a look at level 1 and saw that it was beginner’s Swedish, so I thought, “OK, I’ll just start at the other end!”
And, lo and behold, there were lots of words which I was familiar with to lesser or greater degrees, but had not come across in other courses, so I decided to start there. The levels with adjectives have some good words in them 
And this way, I am covering levels you haven’t done yet!
But it is a huge course so it is no surprise that there are a few typos here and there. No big deal to report or to amend them, thank goodness!
Yup, level 1 to 69 is essentially a copy of the Duolingo tree (but with added synonyms and such).
Everything after 69 is from things that I’ve read - I underline any new words in my books as I come across them and then create lists/spreadsheets and such - or at least I used to (it’s not really necessary anymore unless I’m reading like classic literature novels or poetry).
Lots of C1-C2 vocabulary once you get towards the end (I read a lot of novels), it’s pretty nice.
1 Like
Thank you so much for sharing this with us here on memrise!
I have notebooks where I have written down stuff from books, too, but I haven’t got very far with putting stuff on memrise, I’m afraid …
Level 95 - duplicate found
kraftlös is in Level 96, too
fasansfull - typo in translation, should be appaLLing, not appaLing
But don’t get me wrong, I am not here to criticize the course, I am OVERJOYED to have found a new course with words that I don’t know very well or at all! 
It’s nice to have someone actually reporting mistakes! 
There’s a lot more where that came from… I probably have another 1-2K words, at the very least, underlined in my books and such and many of these are not found in frequency lists like KELLY (although many are… too).
Since I’ve almost finished the course myself, I’ll need to get to work on the new and improved one but I’ll continue to maintain this one.
1 Like
What do people think to this layout? Yes, there’s a lot of information. The new course is intended to be a comprehensive and very in-depth course which isn’t aimed at beginners at all, unlike Duolingo itself.
Default View
Expanded View
There are definitely issues with it but… Memrise is just not powerful enough to do what I want to do.
2 Likes
I don’t like the extended view, I’m afraid; I like the nice neat one with the example.
I particularly like examples which are either very different from how we would say it in English - “vi är fem stycken i familjen” is a perfect example of this - or ones where the construction is very similar, like “ta tid”.
Well, people would be free to not extend the view… I just like the idea of having a lot of useful and optional information in one place.
Here’s another attempt at it, trying to condense/take information away…
Default View
Expanded View
I don’t think I can really do this how I want to do it with such ridiculously limited formatting features (glares at Memrise developers) etc., without using images (which don’t work on mobile).
I may have to reconsider using Memrise for this new course.
Also, I’m aware my IPA sucks (you should see some of the others)… I’m still learning.
I guess I’ll leave these here for a while and see what people have to say - if anything.
To be honest, because Swedish is pretty much phonetic, I wouldn’t bother with the IPA. One option would be to do a single level with the pronunciation of Swedish, which you could find on wikipedia, but it is really not necessary to give the pronunciation for every single word. Once you know how the basic sounds of Swedish work, there’s no need for the IPA. And, of course, the beauty of memrise is that you can add audio, so adding the IPA - which very few people can read anyway - is kind of overkill.
If you want to teach yourself the IPA, then fair enough, but in your shoes I’d want to focus my energies elsewhere.
About a year ago, I was doing the first part of jellybreadracer’s course where someone - I don’t know if it was jellybreadracer himself - had attempted to write the IPA versions of the words and they are HORRIBLY wrong and horribly painful to look at. I can read the IPA fairly well because I taught myself how to write the IPA letters for English. It wasn’t a big deal to learn a few more for Swedish, although there are a couple of vowel sounds that I am never sure about. I then offered to correct the wrong versions but it was a terribly time-consuming and frustrating task and I eventually gave up. Plus I don’t like the course that much anyway (the source material jellybreadracer used was rubbish). I should really go back and just remove all the rubbish IPA that is there because it is worse than useless.
If you do decide to go down the IPA road, the other problem you will encounter - if you haven’t done so already - is that there are hardly any online dictionaries with reliable and accurate renditions of Swedish pronunciations given in the IPA. Lexin has their own idiosyncratic version which is awful, IMHO, and other online dictionaries - to my knowledge - only offer the pronunciation of English words, but not of Swedish words because the dictionaries in question (I’m thinking of ord.se) seem to be aimed at Swedes learning English (which is fair enough) and not vice versa.
Just my two cents on the matter
New question:
where does the audio come from on the course?
The voice sounds authentically Swedish, but I just heard the voice say, “avskyDvärd” when the word is “avskyvärd”, without the D in the middle.
A real Swede would never say it wrongly, surely?
Is this some kind of Swedish robot voice?
Just curious …
To be honest, because Swedish is pretty much phonetic, I wouldn’t bother with the IPA.
… snip …
That’s a very good point… it’s definitely overkill and I should probably avoid it.
If you want to teach yourself the IPA, then fair enough, but in your shoes I’d want to focus my energies elsewhere.
Absolutely.
About a year ago, I was doing the first part of jellybreadracer’s course where someone
… snip …
Well, if I did go that route, I would be buying a book that has the IPA keys for everything which was recommended to me by a linguist and using those. But I probably won’t.
If you do decide to go down the IPA road, the other problem you will encounter
… snip …
Yeah, I was literally moaning about Lexin’s made-up version of IPA a few days ago somewhere else…
where does the audio come from on the course?
It’s the same TTS as is/was used on the Duolingo Swedish course.
A real Swede would never say it wrongly, surely?
Yeah, I fixed a typo the other day (reported by you, even, I believe) but I’m currently unable to update the TTS audio.
1 Like
Apologies if you’re getting re-prompted to review things you already know. I know it’s annoying but it won’t hurt you too much - after all, if you know this vocabulary so well then it should only take you a short while to review it all.
This is due to somewhat sweeping database changes - I’m adding missing parts of speech; highlighting cognates; simplifying overly long prompts and some other stuff.
2 Likes
Thanks for the work you are doing, sustained. On level 17, both “därför att” and “eftersom” have the same translation to english. Is it possible to distinguish them in some way? Is one used more frequently then the other? The translation is “because, since”; can you expand one or shorten the other? Thanks again
1 Like
There IS some kind of difference between the two; they are like “since” (eftersom) and “because” (därför att) in English.
You can use eftersom and since to start a sentence, whereas because and därför att are both conjunctions and, in writing at least, should only be used to join clauses together.
I hope that @sustained can maybe use this information, or just add “not X” and “not Y” to the relevant entries.
You can start a sentence with it in some cases but it’s less common. This is good reading -
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/därför_att#Swedish
I’m aware of the differences, the course just has some issues. Right now, I believe they’re accepted as synonyms for each other but I’ll look into doing it some other way.
2 Likes
Tack så mycket! for the explanation. The grammatical difference really helps me understand and remember it. The two words were not accepted as synonyms–though it seems changed, now. Perhaps the part of speech could be added to “därför att”? Tack
1 Like
Sorry, I’ll get this fixed soon. My phone broke and I am in the process of moving house etc.
I feel your pain!!! My phone went funny a while back and is now 90% functional, but it was horrible not having it for a few days.
I hope the house-move goes smoothly!
1 Like
Yes, good luck with the move!
1 Like