Danske Læsere / Danmark discussion

Introduktion / Nye medlemmer > Learn Danish and Book Discussion

Comments Showing 1-16 of 16 (16 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

✰Christian✰ (clcummins12) | 1 comments Hello everyone!
My name is Christian and I am from the U.S.A. I am not sure if this post will be allowed here (but I hope it is)! I am currently reading the book mentioned above and trying to learn Danish as well because I hope to move to Denmark one day in the future. I was wondering if anyone on here would be willing to help me learn Danish and would be open to skyping/facetiming for some of the lessons so I could make sure my pronunciation is correct.
I would also love to discuss this book with some of you who either have read it or want to read it to see how accurate it is of Denmark.

Hope to hear from you guys!

message 2: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Wow, Stephan ... that is a bit harsh, isn't it?

Christian, nice to meet you. :-)
I saw your post, but didn't reply as I don't have the time to help you out, not with a fulltime job, family and author-career at the side.
I think it is wonderful that you plan to live in another country and even want to make the effort to try to learn the language beforehand.
And I wish for you that you will find somebody who can help you out. If you want, I can post your request on my facebook wall?

I can't relate to Stephans point of view of Denmark. At all!

Danes are a scandinavian and nordic people, but that doesn't mean that they are cold. But we are probably a bit reserved, until we get to know you. :-)

I don't think it is true, that we have no freedom in Denmark. In many ways we have more freedom than in the US, in others way not.
We have the freedom to take whatever education we want (paid for by the state) and we have the freedom to work with whatever we want (if it is available).
We have the luxury of being treated at a hospital no matter what your income is, because its free for everyone. No insurances here that will not cover. We are secured if we loose our job (at least for a while)
But that comes of course with a price, which is a high taxrate.
To compare a DK payslip to a US is horrifying for everyone (especially the danes paying it :-)). But the taxes pay for the wellfare. For everybody.

Granted ... the wellfare has seen better days and right now we have problems with how it is best spend, but that will hopefully work out.

Christian, write a PM to me, and I will be happy to answer any questions you might have about living here in Denmark. The Facetiming/skyping I can't help you with, but like I said ... I will happily try to find somebody in my network for you.

I just don't want you to be scared out by people who think that there actually is such a thing as the "Greatest country" in the world. Denmark is not. But US isn't either.

All countries have their good and bad things. The question is just where you thrive the best.

All the luck,

message 3: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments PS. Another reason for the missing replies is maybe this group. There is not much activity here ...

message 4: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Hi Stephan
I don't know where the idea of Denmark to be the greatest country in the world comes from. Somehow Denmark has been a part of the presidential campagne in USA, but it is not the Danes who has put it there (at least I don't think so).
Denmark is - like most other western civilised countries - full of good things and bad things. If "you" want, the world is open to you, like it is in the US. Yes, we have free education and do not have to pay for our colleges, but if you are a product of your environment and do not have the ability to raise above the anchors that some people have in their lives, you will go nowhere. Like I assume it is the case in the US or other countries.
What "rubbed me off" in your remark, was the fact that it seemed you wanted to put down Denmark. I think it is a very common thing, I am allowed to say bad things about my country, but you are not. :-)

Most of the time I don't even think that it is fair to "compare" countries as we have different ways of living, and thank God for that.
For example the whole thing about what a McDonalds employee earns. Why is that even an issue? Yes a McD-employee earns more here, but when I look at an american payslip (I am a chiefbookkeeper with several subsidiaries in different countries in Europe and the US) I notice that you hardly pay taxes. Of course it is not possible to make state-funded wellfare in the same order as in Denmark, where a regular employee pays 42% in taxes, 8% extra work taxes and after that pays 25% in Salestaxes of EVERYTHING we buy. Plus the additional taxes on candy, fuel, and other things that the government thinks is bad for you.
I like the american concept of that YOU are the one taking care of YOUR life instead of the mislead concept of the government thinking for your. But I also kind of like that I know that I always can be treated for any disease I might have, no matter what kind of insurance I have.

Sorry for my rambling, but like I said ... I think the whole discussion is mislead and misplaced. It's simply not comparable.


message 5: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Ehm ... I am not even sure I bother to answer, but apparently I can't help myself.
Of course you can have an opinon about what ever you want. My objection was to the fact that there has been a lot of americans (as DK has been (mis)used in "your" presidential campaign, which have a whole lot of meanings of DK, even though they never had any facts.
And I really resent, when people bear themselves with that "know-it-all-attitude" and have a strong opinion about things they have just heard about.

Like I said ... I don't think it makes any sense to compare countries, because there are so many differences between not only the way of living, but also the culture. What works in DK doesn't necessarly work in the US. And vice versa.
In my daily job I have colleagues in many of the european countries, and also in the US (Georgia), and I can tell you that there is a great difference in they way we think, work and concieve things. And the humor. Maybe especially the humor.
Maybe I expressed myself poorly, but english is not my native language, so if I did, I naturally apologize.

And regarding to pork ... DK's greatest export is pork, so I think that you can eat both bacon and pork. Even though ... in some muslim areas, that would probably be frowned upon, but that is a local discussion which seem to go on everywhere in Europe nowadays.

Oh ... I just now checked out your link. Yeah, exactly. But those are not the danes. If you notice the article says "other ethnic origin" because the so called free press in Europe apparently have difficulties by addressing the problems by it's names, and because our governments are afraid to react to the problems that some muslims are causing.
That is - I'm afraid - a general problem in the world right now, especially in Europe. :-/
Something that you hopefully don't deal a lot with.

message 6: by Anne (new)

Anne (aceriksen) ... you can eat all the artichoke you want in Denmark. Also on pizza. You can also be a vegetarian. Rest assured that we will not assault you just because you don't want to eat a saussage ^^

message 7: by Anne (new)

Anne (aceriksen) No worries :)

message 8: by Anne (last edited Mar 26, 2017 03:02AM) (new)

Anne (aceriksen) Dude, she just wanted to talk about a book she likes. Why are you turning this into a political discussion about integration? Have you read the book? Do you have anything relevant to say about the BOOK? Not just about how you feel Denmark is a shitty country - what does that have to do with the book?
You're really going out of your way to push your own political agenda in a forum that never had anything to do with politics.

message 9: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Stephan, if you hate it so much, why do you live in Denmark, then?
Why this onesided blind critism?
Like I said in reply to your first replies, which are now gone, every country has their flaws and every country has their good parts.
But let me then ask you ... which country do YOU think is doing a good job?

message 10: by Titel1 (new)

Titel1 | 1 comments hi all, I am also one of those who wants to learn Danish. This discussion, would be much interesting and funnier in Danish (not, that it's not in English:)

message 11: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Title1,

That's not quite true.
The Swedes and Norwegians have also ä, ö and å.
The Germans for example has also ä, ö and ü, so does the Swiss and Austrian people.
Besides the "normal" vowels, that is.

But it is true, Danish is often being compared to sound as if you speak with a hot potato in your mouth, and surely I can relate to that. :-)

An other frase, that Danes love to ask foreigners to repeat is:

Rødgrød med fløde.

The d'es are pronounced softly.

Good luck with that. :-)

message 12: by Anika (new)

Anika Eibe | 7 comments Stephan,
I don't know which world you live in, but maybe you are answering something from another debat. I never said anything about knowing a lawyer/being one/or knowing their reasoning.

Yes, you have found some bad examples from our society, but that is not necessarly the same as the truth. The media loves to enrage their viewers/readers and often succeed.
Recently I heard the truth behind a story, which has been very much in the media, and let me just say that it changed my entire view of it. We have a frase here in DK, as you might now, "porn for feelings"? That is what the medias do.
I think you look at things very onesided, and that is your right.

And be also aware that it takes a mighty good writer to use sarcasm and irony. It will often be misunderstood, if not used clearly.

I wish you all the best, and hope that you will change the things, that touches you so deeply.

message 13: by Jacob (new)

Jacob | 2 comments The hell's going on in here

message 14: by Synne (new)

Synne Eriksen | 3 comments Jacob wrote: "The hell's going on in here"

Lol, Jacob, that comment just made my day

message 15: by Camilla, The Girl Who Loved To Read (new)

Camilla (cyqua) | 853 comments Mod
Jacob wrote: "The hell's going on in here"

Indeed... My best guess in involuntary troll feeding :D

message 16: by Stephan (last edited Jun 26, 2017 04:33AM) (new)

Stephan | 1 comments Jacob wrote: "The hell's going on in here"

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill

From chapter II- Of thought and discussion

'If the intellect and judgment of mankind ought to be cultivated, a thing which Protestants at least do not deny, on what can these faculties be more appropriately exercised by any one, than on the things which concern him so much that it is considered necessary for him to hold opinions on them? If the cultivation of the understanding consists in one thing more than in another, it is surely in learning the grounds of one's own opinions. Whatever people believe, on subjects on which it is of the first importance to believe rightly, they ought to be able to defend against at least the common objections. But, some one may say, "Let them be taught the grounds of their opinions. It does not follow that opinions must be merely parroted because they are never heard controverted. Persons who learn geometry do not simply commit the theorems to memory, but understand and learn likewise the demonstrations; and it would be absurd to say that they remain ignorant of the grounds of geometrical truths, because they never hear any one deny, and attempt to disprove them." Undoubtedly: and such teaching suffices on a subject like mathematics, where there is nothing at all to be said on the wrong side of the question. The peculiarity of the evidence of mathematical truths is, that all the argument is on one side. There are no objections, and no answers to objections. But on every subject on which difference of opinion is possible, the truth depends on a balance to be struck between two sets of conflicting reasons. Even in natural philosophy, there is always some other explanation possible of the same facts; some geocentric theory instead of heliocentric, some phlogiston instead of oxygen; and it has to be shown why that other theory cannot be the true one: and until this is shown, and until we know how it is shown, we do not understand the grounds of our opinion. But when we turn to subjects infinitely more complicated, to morals, religion, politics, social relations, and the business of life, three-fourths of the arguments for every disputed opinion consist in dispelling the appearances which favour some opinion different from it. The greatest orator, save one, of antiquity, has left it on record that he always studied his adversary's case with as great, if not with still greater, intensity than even his own. What Cicero practised as the means of forensic success, requires to be imitated by all who study any subject in order to arrive at the truth. He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. The rational position for him would be suspension of judgment, and unless he contents himself with that, he is either led by authority, or adopts, like the generality of the world, the side to which he feels most inclination. Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. That is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form; he must feel the whole force of the difficulty which the true view of the subject has to encounter and dispose of; else he will never really possess himself of the portion of truth which meets and removes that difficulty. Ninety-nine in a hundred of what are called educated men are in this condition; even of those who can argue fluently for their opinions. Their conclusion may be true, but it might be false for anything they know: they have never thrown themselves into the mental position of those who think differently from them, and considered what such persons may have to say; and consequently they do not, in any proper sense of the word, know the doctrine which they themselves profess. They do not know those parts of it which explain and justify the remainder; the considerations which show that a fact which seemingly conflicts with another is reconcilable with it, or that, of two apparently strong reasons, one and not the other ought to be preferred. All that part of the truth which turns the scale, and decides the judgment of a completely informed mind, they are strangers to; nor is it ever really known, but to those who have attended equally and impartially to both sides, and endeavoured to see the reasons of both in the strongest light. So essential is this discipline to a real understanding of moral and human subjects, that if opponents of all important truths do not exist, it is indispensable to imagine them, and supply them with the strongest arguments which the most skilful devil's advocate can conjure up.

To abate the force of these considerations, an enemy of free discussion may be supposed to say, that there is no necessity for mankind in general to know and understand all that can be said against or for their opinions by philosophers and theologians. That it is not needful for common men to be able to expose all the misstatements or fallacies of an ingenious opponent. That it is enough if there is always somebody capable of answering them, so that nothing likely to mislead uninstructed persons remains unrefuted. That simple minds, having been taught the obvious grounds of the truths inculcated on them, may trust to authority for the rest, and being aware that they have neither knowledge nor talent to resolve every difficulty which can be raised, may repose in the assurance that all those which have been raised have been or can be answered, by those who are specially trained to the task'
John Stuart Mill

back to top