Questions & Answers about Jag tror att hans chef har ett möte.
Do I need the word att here, or can I leave it out?
Both are fine. Jag tror att hans chef har ett möte is slightly more formal/neutral. In everyday speech, many people drop att: Jag tror hans chef har ett möte. The word order in the clause stays the same either way (subject before the verb: hans chef har).
Why is it att hans chef har and not att har hans chef?
After att (a subordinate clause), Swedish does not use verb-second. The finite verb comes after the subject: att [subject] [verb] → att hans chef har.... Putting the verb before the subject here (att har hans chef...) is ungrammatical in standard Swedish.
Why is there no article before chef? Why not hans en chef or hans chefen?
In Swedish, possessives (like hans, hennes, min, vår) replace the article. So you say hans chef, not hans en chef or hans chefen. Compare:
- en chef = a boss
- chefen = the boss
- hans chef = his boss (no article, no definite ending)
Why is it ett möte and not en möte?