Modal Particles in Danish

We Danes use these small words all the time!
Do you want to avoid being left out of the conversion? Do you want to understand the small subtleties in conversational Danish? Then you should have your eyes (and your ears) wide open for modal particles.
In this video we will have a look at the following modal particles (på dansk: modalpartikler):
jo
nok
da
altså
vel
mon
vist
Mic's Languages
Speak it for real!
micslanguages.com
/ micslanguages
/ micslanguages
/ micslanguages

[@1skaldur]

I'm moving to Denmark. Yes I am.! Thanks for the motivation.!

[@MicsLanguages]

Great! Good luck 😉

[@kantamana1]

the soul of danish language is in the modal particles

[@yaroslavliutnik5594]

Amazing work, thank you.

[@brookefossey8758]

Dette er et rigtig fedt emne. Disse små ord er meget svære at forstå 😅 Tak for videoen, Mic!

[@MicsLanguages]

Ja det er et super interessant emne, og virkelig en udfordring for folk der har et modersmål hvor man ikke bruger modalpartikler, eller hvor man i hvert fald ikke bruger dem så meget som på dansk. Mange tak for din kommentar :)

[@TatianaRacheva]

@@MicsLanguages I guess I'm fortunate that Russian also employs a ton of modal particles, so intuitively it makes sense to have them. I never noticed, until now, that English doesn't have any. It has modal adverbs, but that's as close as it gets.

[@TheLashab]

Thank you for the content. Can you make a video about the liaison in Danish language?

[@JohnJohn-us8pc]

Sooooooo relevant. Thanks! And keep em coming!

[@signeknudsen8513]

You are so good at explaining the nuances of these words.

[@aneesmughal2949]

Kære Mic, tusind tak for videoen,it was very helpful and informative,i will wait for next new video,i am a beginner so i have learned so many new things which i was totally unaware of and never got to hear before this video, you are the best, thanks again for the help you are doing i really appreciate it.

[@MicsLanguages]

Tusind tak for din søde kommentar, Anees 😊

[@SophiaandHaakenPedersen]

Thank you very much for all your danish language videos. I find them of high quality and very helpful.

[@MicsLanguages]

Thank you very much for the nice words! 🙂

[@gagegilbert4409]

Mange tak for videoen!

[@ABDULHAKIM-pe2kk]

sir,video content is very impressive

[@DanimarkadabirTURK]

Tusind tak for denne video 💚🤍

[@Chitrapanta1]

I repeatedly listen your videos about language. Thank you !

[@MicsLanguages]

That's great. Thank you :)

[@jasonlove8733]

Your vlogs are incredibly useful and educational!! Tak

[@MicsLanguages]

Mange tak!

[@erickarlsen5488]

Hej Mic. Jeg er pæredansk. I think you should have explained, that modal particles often "eats" a word in the sentence. So, "Det er jo Thomas" is spoken as "Det jo Thomas", "Det vel Thomas", "Det nok Thomas", "Mon det Thomas" and so on. Thats why we notice the modal particle even thou we may not hear it, as you explained, because "er" is missing.

[@MicsLanguages]

Thanks for your input. I'm afraid I have to disagree. Is it really the modal particle that makes the word "er" disappear? Think about these sentences: Det er klart! Der er mange! Så er det nu! Most of us wouldn't pronounce "er" here either, would we? Even though there is no modal particle. But thanks for writing anyway and giving it some thought!

[@jpat_]

Super great forklaringer. Hadn’t encountered _mon_ actually, so cool to see it here. Fine exempelsætninger forresten. Du ved vel hvilke jeg mener. :D But a nice variety of examples also, and well thought out. I think it’s all pretty clear, but this will be a good one to come back to. I really enjoy this topic så er jeg taknemmelig for denne video. Take care!

[@MicsLanguages]

Mange tak! Dejligt at høre that it was helpful and that you consider watching it again to get more details. Og tusind tak for dine positive ord om my example sentences 😊🙂😁

[@lohphat]

It's interesting that "jo" 's other role as an emphatic modal particle follows the French word "si" once again too in similar meaning. e.g. "Je suis si sur que vous étiez là!" (I am so sure you were there!)

[@MicsLanguages]

Oh, that's interesting. The use of si makes sense to me there. In Portuguese you could do something similar with the word sim. But portuguese doesn't have two words like French (si and oui), as you wrote earlier. Thanks, interesting information :)

[@francoishandfield3797]

So interesting! Because "jo" also means "si" in french in another way: when correcting positively a negative affirmation. e.g. "-Tu n'as pas brossé tes dents. -Si! J'ai brossé mes dents!"

[@isabelleborges696]

Estou aprendendo dinamarquês e você está me ajudando muito. Obrigada, Mic!

[@MicsLanguages]

Massa! Obrigado pelo carinho, Isabelle! :)

[@JohnJohn-us8pc]

Maybe you can do one on "egentlig"

[@tanyasullivan939]

What about the particle ''os'', a friend of mine is using it a lot but I can't seem to find anything about it.

[@MicsLanguages]

Os is not a particle. I presume it's the word "også" (=also), which we pronounce like "os". The other possibility is the pronoun os (=us). Which one do you think it is?

[@sigganordgaardhansen1425]

Hej Michael! God video! 😊👌 Håber du har det godt!

[@MicsLanguages]

Hej Sigga! Godt at se dig her 🙂 Jeg har det rigtig fint, tak. Håber også at du og din familie har det godt! 😉

[@WhiteandBlack]

Thank you very much for good content! Interesting whether the actors in 'Bron/Broen' could understand each other without the interpreters or they didn't.

[@Joakim7471]

Swedish and Danish are kind of the same language, especially written. But we pronounce the words very differently. You can absolutely get used to it and understand Danish as a Swede, but it is not as seamless as Swedish and Norwegian where the pronunciation is almost the same. This is maybe not an answer. Danes and Swedes can understand each other like in the tv-series, but maybe not every Dane understand a Swede and vice versa. In Mics examples ”jo” is in Swedish ”ju”, ”da” is ”då” (cognate in English ”then”), ”nok” is ”nog” in Swedish (cognate with English ”enough”), ”altså” is ”alltså”, ”vel” is ”väl” (cognate with English ”well”), ”mon” is ”månne”. The words are the same and they mean the same in Swedish and Danish. We don’t use them exactly the same way, but its easy to understand how a dane build a sentence anyway as a Swede and vice versa, because the words mean the same thing.

[@richardwood2893]

Takk! Videoene dine kan nok hjelpe til å lære norsk også 😊

[@MicsLanguages]

Haha. De to sprog har jo meget til fælles, så måske har du ret 🤔

[@fritmore]

whats the difference in pronunciation between DET and DA?😶

[@annepamelamanning]

I have searched a lot to check if u have made a video explaining the difference between tror and synes. But I can’t seem to find one. I get these mixed up very often.

[@MicsLanguages]

Yeah I also don't think I live made it yet. I guess I should put it more towards the top of my list now that you ask about it several times :)

[@witpit]

Thanks

[@AbCd-lw5vs]

I didn't realise Danish had diacritics. What's the purpose of the accent on the e in 'dér'? And do accents appear anywhere else in Danish?

[@MicsLanguages]

We use them rarely on the E. For example in the word idé (=idea), it is possible to use it. But ide is also correct. Another place where we use it, is on the word én, when we want to make clear that we mean the number one, and not the article "a". én person = one person vs. en person = a person In this particular video, I don't remember how I used dér, but the accent can be used to show that we mean the long form of the word der vs. the short form.

[@habbomanish]

Hi. How do I know when to use -ene or -erne at the end of some plural worlds? Like sandwichene and kvinderne and drengene? What determines when to use -erne or -ene?

[@MicsLanguages]

Whether a plural noun has -e or -er is often something you learn by heart. But you can generally say, if the singular ends in -e, the plural will be -er. For example lampe, lamper, taske, tasker. Generally, if the singular ends in a consonant, the plural is -e (but only generally).

[@habbomanish]

@@MicsLanguages Dreng in plural form is drenge which leads to drengene without the R while kvinde in plural form is kvinder and therefore, because of the R, leads to kvindERNE. So Kvinde ends with a vocal so thats why it leads to -ER as i understand from your answer. And dreng ends with a consonant so that leads to -e -ene. hest, heste, hestene. (consonant) Kilde, kilder, kilderne (vocal) elefant, elefanter, elefanterne. (consonant but still -er appelsin, appelsiner, appelsinerne (consonant but still -er. So there are obviously exceptions concerning elefant and appelsin. And that means that you simply just have to learn them by yourself since there is no clear rule?

[@MicsLanguages]

Exactly, you got it! The "rules" I gave you are very general and have lots of exceptions. And apart from that, there are also lots of irregular plural forms, fx et kort, to kort, en mand, to mænd, et ben, to ben. So the rules are there to help, so you can make an educated guess for a word where you are not sure, but they will not always work.

[@majordislikeforyoutubespol4029]

Selv som dansker er det egentligt ret interessant at se det her. Jeg er i gang med at lære japansk p.t. og jeg synes at kunne se nogle interessante ligheder som jeg aldrig havde tænkt over

[@majordislikeforyoutubespol4029]

man tænker jo heller ikke over hvordan partikler generelt bliver brugt heller. jeg kan i hvert fald ikke huske det blev lært tilbage i folkeskolen...

[@MicsLanguages]

Ja, det er et super interessant emne. Man tager ofte den slags facetter af sit eget sprog for givet. Det er fascinerende når man først bliver opmærksom på alle de forskellige danske modalpartikler. De er forholdsvis svære at forstå på et kognitivt plan. Selvom vi alle sammen godt ved hvordan de skal bruges. Jeg tror at de her ting som er mere frekvente i talesproget og mindre i skriftsproget ofte bliver behandlet som mindreværdige og derfor ikke er et emne i fx folkeskolen. Det er interessant at høre at du kan se ligheder mellem dansk og japansk. Jeg kan desværre intet japansk overhovedet, men jeg har før hørt eller læst at partikler er en vigtig del af det japanske sprog. En anden ting de to sprog har til fælles er "stød". Det er i hvert fald sådan det lyder når man hører japansk. Som om alle ord har stød. God fornøjelse med dine japanskstudier og tak for din kommentar!

[@bigburritolover]

bom vídeo

[@palavra_viva_pt]

Tak, Mic. Måske en video om hvor man bruges, "kunne lide", "synes om", "bryder mig", "sæt pris på", kunne være interessant, vel? (espero que esteja correto :-) )

[@MicsLanguages]

Hej Ricardo! Interessant forslag. Hvis du skriver "kunne lide" og "synes om" i infinitiv, så bør du også skrive "bryde sig om" og "sætte pris på". Jeg skriver dit forslag på min liste!

[@MicsLanguages]

og det "vel?" du bruger i slutningen skal være "ikke?" Men det lyder faktisk ikke så godt her. Det er nok bedst at udelade ordet "ikke" her.

[@pragmatastic]

Kanon, tak! Det kan nok være et rigtig indviklet område for mange af os. Jeg sætter pris på forklaringerne - samt på det aktuelle indhold! ("We're gonna need to build a bigger prison", som man siger!)

[@MicsLanguages]

Haha 😁 Både danske modalpartikler og verdenssituationen er indviklede, uden tvivl ;)

[@barshagurung2164]

KAN DU LAVE VIDEOEN OM 'SÅDAN' ?

[@MicsLanguages]

Tak, jeg har tilføjet det til min liste

[@BetaTestingUrGf]

jeg elsker de politiske undertoner xd

[@MicsLanguages]

Jeg kan ikke lade være 😁

[@TatianaRacheva]

What about "dog"? I saw it before, and just saw it in this sentence: "[Du får ikke pengene] Men en gave skal du dog alligevel have". I found it on Den Danske Ordbog, but it's a bit above my level to comprehend

[@MicsLanguages]

Oh yeah, dog is also a nice word. It means several things, and I wouldn't be able to list all its meanings without thinking about it for some time. I'm your example, I would say it has a similar meaning to "men", it is used to contrast sth. with sth. else. Often, dog means the same as men, but the syntax is different. John har boet i DK i 5 år. Men han taler ikke dansk. means the same as (or at least 99 per cent the same as): John har boet i DK i 5 år. Han taler dog ikke dansk. So, since in your sentence they use both men and dog, I would say it just makes it a bit stronger. And at the same time the sentence in this particular case just sounds better with men AND dog than it would with only one of the two words, even though having only men or dog is also totally correct in this situation.

[@TatianaRacheva]

@@MicsLanguages thank you! The sentence is from the movie A Fortunate Man, by the way

[@MicsLanguages]

Ah cool, how did you like the movie? I haven't watched it (yet?) 🙂

[@AubreyKnight]

"I wonder if Mette will go to prison for this" 😂😂😂😂

[@MicsLanguages]

Hahaha, yeah, you got it! 😉 I still wonder, but I don't have much faith in all those things any more. 😒

[@jeremycline9542]

nok reminds me of "wohl" in German

[@MicsLanguages]

I would say that wohl is more like vel in Danish. - Hvor ved han det fra? - Han har vel spurgt hende? = - Woher weiß er das? - Er hat sie wohl gefragt? Nok might be more like schon. Det skal nok gå. = Das wird schon. Das wird schon gehen. Modal particles are not always easy to translate one to one, especially because their meaning is a bit diffuse. In some cases nok might easily mean wohl, as you say. Feel free to write me any specific examples you could think of.

[@jeremycline9542]

@@MicsLanguages Thanks so much! On Netflix I also constantly hear "godt" and it must be modal as I can't see the literal meaning.

[@MicsLanguages]

Is it "godt" used inside sentences, or as a kind of exclamation? Inside sentences it of course means good and well, but it also is used as an affirmative word, as opposed to "ikke" (not). For example, suppose we are starting a Zoom call, I can say: "Jeg kan ikke høre dig, men jeg kan godt se dig." As an exclamation, it can mean something along the lines "well, let's move on. What's the next step in resolving the crime...?" Does this make sense?

[@jeremycline9542]

@@MicsLanguages So is godt also a modal particle if it is often not translated into English at all?

[@MicsLanguages]

Yes, in some cases I would definitely say it's a modal particle. For example the sentence I gave you with "jeg kan godt se dig" Another example "vil du ikke godt hjælpe mig?" Won't you please help me. Here the word please kind of expresses the same thing that godt does.

[@eliaso.graversen5744]

What about "det var dog utroligt!" ? 🙈

[@MicsLanguages]

Hi! With this super Danish name it sounds like you should know 😉 But since you ask, I suppose that you seriously don't speak Danish. Then you at least have one Danish parent, right? The word "dog" in this sentence means something like "really", "this is really unbelievable". The speaker might express a sense of irritation with another person, for example a parent annoyed at a child that repeatedly does something "wrong". That's at least the situation that first comes to mind when I see this sentence out of context. I hope this makes sense to you :)

[@LittleImpaler]

I had no idea that Danish had such a thing. Usually you find particles them in Asian languages.

[@MicsLanguages]

Germán is also full of them

[@LittleImpaler]

@@MicsLanguages Yes, you reminded me of that. Thank you. The modal particals in German I didn't view as particals anymore. Oh, I just saw this video. Thought it might interest you. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3qYdYOqaKyYldU