I have just taken delivery of a Sjoberg 1800BS. There is an A4 sheet enclosed with what I believe to be assembly instructions - unfortunately in Swedish! It is obviously important as it is printed on Red paper! See scan of sheet...
Two questions....
Thanks, Roy
Go here:
Hmmm - No Swedish on that translator...
I did find one...
Wouldn't even tx the heading! Thanks, Roy
This site has is written by a Swedish bloke, and he has a translator frame on the site.
It's actually not that important and is only how to assemble the trestle, which is pretty obvious anyway.
Didn't you get the white sheet with the exploded diagram?
At any rate, the legs are simply bolted to the rails using the captive nuts that fit into the recesses.
One thing is that if you have bought any of the drawer units, it's easier to assemble them and drop them into the frame before installing the top rails and the top.
The top of the bench is then lifted into place noting that it goes one way round.
You then attach the metal brackets to secure the top to the base and that's it.
No meatballs and lingonberries required.
I called the factory to check on a couple of other parts and they are very helpful. However, more than likely they will be closed down for another week since most businesses in Sweden close or drop to skeleton level for most or all of July.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
main points, which you can see here:
Andy, Thanks for the help. Yes it looks pretty obvious... No I don't have any drawer units yet.... Later.... Will the top have to come of when I fit them later or can they be squeezed in? Thanks, Roy
Each of the drawer units comes with a pair of wooden blocks that are fitted to to top and bottom of them. These locate against the insides of the rails of the trestles and their purpose is to prevent the units sliding forward or back .
I added drawers on two occasions. On one I slackened the bolts of the trestle a little and took out the top front rail and then dropped the units in. On the other I slid the units in without the blocks and fitted them using an angled electric screwdriver.
I didn't take the top off on either occasion, but obviously if you slacken anything take great care.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
English is quite easy to learn for a foreigner, hence its universal appeal. The basics are easy with complicated gender. It is the bits after that, that become difficult.
I work with and talk to people every day who do not have English as their first language and mostly they would not agree with you.
- Vocabulary is a problem because there are generally two words at least for everything - one derived from the Latin/French root and the other from the German root. There may be a gaelic derived word as well.
- There is no consistency at all or phonetic pronunciation. Think of the pronunciation of cough, rough, through, though, plough, thought. At least in French and German pronunciation is virtually always the same for a given letter group.
- Tenses are complex and again are inconsistent.
- Gender is the one thing that is relatively easy in English since virtually everything is neuter. French has two genders and German, I believe three.
The relative universality of English in the western world at least is a good thing as regards people being able to communicate, but I don't think we should kid ourselves that people learn it by cultural preference.
The gradual demise of minority languages and the subsequent impact to cultural diversity is not a good thing IMHO.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
When once they spake with many tongues, they drew swords to fight their differences. So the populous was given one language to speak, and would you believe it made things worse. The only due to be given to this, is the fact that they all understood one another, and this caused them to realise that their differences were all exactly the same as each others. So to fight was the only way to make changes in power and not to conclude any difference.
Paragraph taken from a philosophy book I read many years ago. I still don't think I understand the full meaning. :-))
Most people I know who have learnt English have always said the basics are easy. Which they are. Forget where it came from and the words are easy too. The next stage is where it gets rough. Where people get confused in the slang/metaphors/euphemisms/similes etc, US and English, which are predominant in speech and on TV.
It tends to have a word, maybe derived from German/Norse, and then uses a Latin word to give a parallel meaning, which enhances. The recent Melvyn Bragg TV prog on English explains this very well.
I fink I fot about sumfin like this.
This ESL teacher would beg to differ.
You think that this isn't a problem in other languages? I assue you it is.
Agree this is a problem, but at the most basic levels new words are learnt by rote, only advanced students learn new words simply by reading them.
Sorry, which tenses are complex. Oh the future ones. You get up to intermediate level before you even start these and even then you can ignore them. It is perfectly possible to have understandable conversations using the present and sticking 'tomorrow' on the end (as it seems to be in most languages). ISTM that the required tenses are simple (only having one of two conjunctions) and usually regular in the basis tenses, try comparing this with a language that has a choice of 18 conjunctions (6 for each of the three verb types) and where a couple of 100 common verbs are irregular.
Eh, what is the gender that the others are then?
yes, and damned hard it is to learn too.
And then there are the 'cases'. We have one in english (so you don't appreciate there being any others) and because foreign languages are taught in a foreign language you get no meaningful explanation as to what each case is, boy this is hard!
Oh, and German pluralisation makes the English rules look simple (!)
I could go on.
No-one would learn any foreign language by cultural preference? The motivation is always a need to communicate with non-nationals. I doubt that many choose by difficulty either, no-one would learn japanese if this were the case
Agreed, but this has little to do with the choice of English as a second language
Tim
I didn't say that it was an issue in other languages. However the English vocabulary is large and with duplicates for most words. In languages having predominantly a single root this is less of an issue. I didn't say that it was a black and white issue, simply that relatively speaking, English has a much larger vocabulary.
Which of itself makes it harder to learn. Learning by rote isn't the easiest way to acquire skills to a substantial degree
I'm sure it's possible to have understandable conversations in most languages in that way, and that might be good enough for being a tourist etc. It likely won't be in a business situation where understanding accurately is more important.
???
I didn't have a lot of difficulty with French. I agree that German is difficult.
It's a case of use and demand. For example in Finland, there is a program to coin new words as required rather than borrowing them from English or Swedish. When you have a population of only about 4m speaking a language (with Estonian being reasonably close), specific things like this have to be done to preserve the language, literature and culture.
Closer to home we have the situation of Welsh. I lived for several years in North Wales in an area where Welsh was and is a significant first language. I am still regularly in touch with people in the area. Thirty odd years ago I knew of a small number of people in the area who only spoke Welsh, and a significant number who spoke English very definitely as a second language, through necessity. In those respects, I am told that Welsh is not in as strong a position today as it was a generation ago. The strong influence of English in a variety of ways is certainly responsible for this
Fortunately, there is enough attention and motivation to recognise what is happening. I hope that this is strong enough to preserve the cultural and literary richness that comes from the Welsh language.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
You said "English was harder to learn than other languages because of....."
One of the reasons was because of the multiple choice of words. As this is equally a problem in many languages, it cannot be a reason why English is 'harder' (it may be a reason why learning english is hard but then all languages would be equally hard)
But it is the way all beginners learn whatever language they are learning.
You claimed that English was harder at all levels. I was refuting that.
In any case, I converse with foreigners at a 'business' level and few of them get (amongst other things) the future correct, I make allowances because it is their second (or third!) language. If you mean that there is a need to be precise at a 'commercial' level then you should be getting a professional translation for which the rule is that you should only used a translator who translates into their mother tongue (much the same as the politicians who will happily answer questions asked in another language but only give their answers in their own language).
If only 'virtually everthing' is neuter, there are some which are something else?
I must say that I can't recall I had a problem with French, wish I could remember why? tim
OK, if you want to pick the fly sh*t out of the pepper - the vocabulary for English is larger than two of the major languages (ergo Latin/French and German) that supply many of its words put together. Since both tend to be used commonly in the case of a lot of words (e.g. hard and difficult), it is an illustration that people are likely to need to learn both.
Er no. I certainly didn't learn French that way.
No I didn't. I was generalising and illustrating.
It tends to depend on the country and of course on the individual.
Having a translator for normal conversational business meetings, at least in the areas I move in in the rest of Europe is fairly rare and in most cases an overkill. Nevertheless, if I believe that there is any doubt in what somebody is saying, I will ask them whether they mean a) or b). I also take great care not to use complicated sentence constructions and slang. If somebody has taken the trouble to learn and work in my native language, then I think that it's good manners to help them a little.
e.g. a ship (female), although not in the sense that other languages use gender.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
In short you can communicate using "basic" English, which is simple enough. Not Esperanto, but easy enough for foreigners to pick up.
In German they would say Die flasher, "He bottle". We do not say "she ship". The term she is used "affectionately" for a ship in English.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.