Question 1

This lesson focuses on using "skulle" for disbelief. Could we use "skulle" in this sentence to make it sound more indignant?

Accepted Answer

Yes! Right now, it is a direct question about a literal belief. To add that rhetorical, indignant flavor using skulle, you could say Tror du verkligen att jag skulle svälta? (Do you really think I would starve?). Alternatively, you could restructure it entirely to ask Varför skulle jag hålla på att svälta? (Why on earth would I be starving?).

Question 2

Why use höll på att svälta instead of just the simple past tense verb svalt?

Accepted Answer

The phrase hålla på att followed by an infinitive is used to show that an action is ongoing, much like the English past continuous. If you said att jag svalt, it sounds like a completed historical fact (that I starved). Using höll på att svälta emphasizes the ongoing process (that I was starving) at that specific moment in the past.

Question 3

I have also seen hålla på att translated as "about to". Could this sentence mean "Do you really believe I was about to starve?"

Accepted Answer

Absolutely. Hålla på att frequently translates to being on the verge of doing something. Without more context, this sentence can comfortably mean either that you were in the process of starving or that you were about to starve. Both interpretations capture the dramatic exaggeration perfectly.

Question 4

If I want to make the second part negative (believe that I was not starving), where does inte go?

Accepted Answer

Because att jag höll på att svälta is a subordinate clause, you must apply the BIFF rule. This means the sentence adverb inte goes right before the first, finite verb. It becomes: Tror du verkligen att jag inte höll på att svälta?

Tror du verkligen att jag höll på att svälta?

Breakdown of Tror du verkligen att jag höll på att svälta?

Questions & Answers about Tror du verkligen att jag höll på att svälta?

Learn Tror du verkligen att jag höll på att svälta and more in Swedish