Chefen ställer in mötet idag.

The boss cancels the meeting today.

Breakdown of Chefen ställer in mötet idag.

• idag: today
• mötet: the meeting
• chefen: the boss
• ställa in: to put in

Questions & Answers about Chefen ställer in mötet idag.

What exactly does ställer in mean here, and what is its literal meaning?

In this sentence, ställer in means “cancels”.

Literally:

• ställa = to put, to place, to set
• in = in, inside

So ställa in originally meant something like “to put/adjust in”, and in some contexts it still has that sense (for example, ställa in TV:n = “tune/set the TV”).

But as a particle verb, ställa in has the idiomatic meaning “to cancel”, especially with events or plans:

• De ställde in konserten. = They cancelled the concert.
• Vi måste ställa in resan. = We have to cancel the trip.

Is ställer in one verb or two separate words?

Grammatically it’s treated as one verb, a particle verb, even though it’s written as two words.

• ställa = main verb
• in = verbal particle

Together they form a fixed unit ställa in = “to cancel”.

Characteristics:

• In main clauses, the particle usually comes right after the verb:
  Chefen ställer in mötet.
• In infinitive form, the att goes before the verb, but the particle stays after:
  att ställa in mötet = to cancel the meeting
  (not att in ställa)

So you should memorize ställa in as if it were a single verb: “to cancel”.

Why is it Chefen and not Chef for “the boss”?

Swedish often uses a suffix instead of a separate word for “the”.

• chef = boss
• chefen = the boss

There is no separate article like “the” in front; it’s built into the noun:

• en chef = a boss
• chefen = the boss

So Chefen ställer in mötet idag. = The boss cancels the meeting today.

Why is it mötet and not möte?

Same idea as with chefen: the -et ending marks “the”.

• ett möte = a meeting
• mötet = the meeting

Pattern:

• ett-word (neuter) → definite singular: add -et
  
  • ett hus → huset (a house → the house)
  • ett möte → mötet (a meeting → the meeting)

So mötet must be used here because we mean the specific meeting.

Why is the tense present (ställer) if it refers to something happening “today”? Isn’t that future?

Swedish very often uses the present tense for near future actions, especially when they are planned, scheduled, or decided.

• Chefen ställer in mötet idag.
  = The boss is cancelling / will cancel the meeting today.

Other examples:

• Jag åker till Stockholm imorgon.
  = I’m going to Stockholm tomorrow / I will go to Stockholm tomorrow.
• Vi börjar klockan åtta.
  = We start at eight / We will start at eight.

You can also use a more explicit future form, but the simple present is very natural here.

Could I say Chefen kommer att ställa in mötet idag instead? Is there a difference?

Yes, that is correct:

• Chefen kommer att ställa in mötet idag.
  = The boss is going to cancel the meeting today.

Difference in nuance:

• Chefen ställer in mötet idag.
  – Simple, factual, often sounds like a decided schedule/action.
• Chefen kommer att ställa in mötet idag.
  – Slightly more like “is going to cancel”, sometimes focusing more on the future result or your expectation/prediction.

Both are fine; in everyday speech, the simple present version is very common.

Where would I put inte if I want to say: “The boss is not cancelling the meeting today”?

You normally place inte after the finite verb (ställer) and before the particle (in):

• Chefen ställer inte in mötet idag.
  = The boss is not cancelling the meeting today.

Word order:

• Subject: Chefen
• Verb: ställer
• Negation: inte
• Particle: in
• Object: mötet
• Time: idag

You should not say:

• ✗ Chefen ställer in inte mötet idag. (wrong in normal word order)

Why is the word order Chefen ställer in mötet idag and not like English “The boss today cancels the meeting”?

Swedish main clauses follow a V2 rule: the finite verb is in second position.

Here:

1. Chefen (first element = subject)
2. ställer (finite verb – must be second)
3. in (particle)
4. mötet (object)
5. idag (time adverbial)

So the core must be [something] + ställer + ....

If you move idag to the front, the verb still stays second:

• Idag ställer chefen in mötet.
  (Today the boss cancels the meeting.)

Order is flexible for emphasis, but that second-position verb rule in main clauses is very stable.

Can ställer in mötet ever mean “sets up the meeting” instead of “cancels the meeting”?

No, ställer in mötet does not mean “sets up the meeting”. It means “cancels the meeting”.

To express “set up / arrange the meeting”, you would use other verbs, for example:

• ordnar mötet = arranges the meeting
• bokar mötet = books the meeting
• planerar mötet = plans the meeting
• sätter upp ett möte or bokar in ett möte = schedules a meeting

So:

• Chefen ställer in mötet. = The boss cancels the meeting.
• Chefen bokar in ett möte. = The boss schedules a meeting.

Is idag always written as one word? I’ve seen i dag too.

Both forms exist and are correct:

• idag – one word (very common in modern writing)
• i dag – two words (more traditional; still correct and used)

They mean exactly the same:

• Chefen ställer in mötet idag.
• Chefen ställer in mötet i dag.

Most everyday texts now prefer idag.

Can I change the position of idag in the sentence?

Yes, idag (today) is fairly flexible. All of these are natural, with slightly different emphasis:

1. Chefen ställer in mötet idag.
   – Neutral, very common.
2. Idag ställer chefen in mötet.
   – Emphasis on today.
3. Chefen idag ställer in mötet.
   – Possible but more marked, often used in written or rhetorical style, not the most neutral spoken order.

Just remember the V2 rule in main clauses:

• If something other than the subject comes first (like Idag), the verb (ställer) must still be second.

How do you pronounce the words in Chefen ställer in mötet idag?

Approximate pronunciations (Swedish standard):

• Chefen ≈ “SHEH-fen”
  
  • ch / sj sound: like a “sh” but further back in the mouth
• ställer ≈ “STELL-er” (short e; double l → longer l sound)
• in ≈ “in” (like English “in”)
• mötet ≈ “MUR-teht”
  
  • ö similar to the vowel in British “nurse” or French “peu”
• idag ≈ “ee-DAHG” (often the final g is very soft or almost silent in casual speech)

Spoken quickly, the whole sentence flows together:

• “SHEH-fen STELL-er in MUR-teht ee-DAHG.”

Does chefen say anything about the boss’s gender, or is it gender-neutral?

Chefen is gender-neutral in modern Swedish.

• chefen can refer to a male or female boss.
• There is no different noun form based on gender.

If needed, context or pronouns show the gender:

• Chefen sa att han ställer in mötet. = The boss said he is cancelling the meeting.
• Chefen sa att hon ställer in mötet. = The boss said she is cancelling the meeting.

But the noun chefen itself does not change.