Past Logical Deductions
When playing detective and trying to piece together a sequence of events, you often need to make logical assumptions about things that have already happened.
| I found this footprint at the scene. | Ég fann þetta fótspor á vettvanginum. |
In English, when we draw a conclusion based on evidence, we say someone "must have done" something. In Icelandic, you express this past logical deduction using the verb hljóta.
To form these deductions, combine the conjugated verb hljóta (must), the infinitive phrase að hafa (to have), and the supine form (sagnbót) of your main action verb.
Conjugation of the strong verb hljóta:
| Pronoun | Form of hljóta |
|---|---|
| ég | hlýt |
| þú | hlýtur |
| hann / hún / það | hlýtur |
| við | hljótum |
| þið | hljótið |
| þau | hljóta |
Notice how the conjugated form of hljóta is followed directly by að hafa and the supine:
| Someone must have left the fingerprint and the footprint behind at the scene. | Einhver hlýtur að hafa skilið eftir fingrafarið og fótsporið á vettvanginum. |
| The culprit must have fled through the window. | Sökudólgurinn hlýtur að hafa flúið í gegnum gluggann. |
You can use this pattern with any action verb to theorize about an investigation:
| The police must have accused an innocent man. | Lögreglan hlýtur að hafa ásakað saklausan mann. |
| They must have interrogated her about the alibi. | Þeir hljóta að hafa yfirheyrt hana um fjarvistarsönnunina. |
You can also make deductions about abstract situations rather than specific actions by using the supine of the verb "to be" (verið):
| It must have been logical to chase the culprit. | Það hlýtur að hafa verið rökrétt að elta sökudólginn. |