Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Icelandic grammar and vocabulary.
Questions & Answers about Síminn skemmist oft.
How does the -st ending change the meaning of the verb here?
The active verb is skemma, which means "to damage" or "to ruin" (for example, if someone drops a phone). Adding the -st ending to make it skemmist changes it to a passive or spontaneous action meaning "gets damaged." We use this because we are talking about what happens to the phone, without focusing on who or what is breaking it.
Why is Síminn in the nominative case if it is the thing receiving the damage?
In an active sentence (like "I damaged the phone"), the phone would be the object and take the accusative case (símann). However, when we use an -st verb for a passive action, the thing receiving the action becomes the grammatical subject of the sentence. Therefore, Síminn must be in the nominative case.
Could I say Síminn er skemmdur oft instead of using the -st verb?
No, that would sound quite unnatural. Er skemmdur (is damaged) describes a static condition or state, acting like an adjective. Because the sentence includes oft (often), we are describing a recurring event where the phone gets damaged over and over, so the dynamic action of the -st verb skemmist is required.
Just to refresh, why does Síminn have a double N at the end?