Prepositions describe relations; they often locate one entity (a ‘participant’) relative to another (a ‘landmark’) in space. For example, in Kari ligger i senga, ‘Kari is in bed’, the preposition i, ‘in’ describes the relation between Kari and senga, ‘the bed’ – she is located relative to the landmark, the bed. In Knut sitter ved det gamle spisebordet, ‘Knut is sitting at the old dining-table’, ved, ‘at’ describes the relation between Knut and det gamle spisebordet.
However, things are often not so simple. Prepositions can involve temporal relations; locating events in time, as in Kari synger i kveld, ‘Kari is singing tonight’; Beate kommer om åtte dager, ‘Beate will come in eight days’. They can involve more complex abstract relations, as in Arve er glad i Kari, ‘Arve is fond of Kari’; Siri var sint på Unni, ‘Siri was angry with Unni’. In such examples, it may be hard to explain the choice of prepositions, precisely because the relation is more abstract. Why should Norwegians say glad i, sint på, when the English say ‘fond of’, ‘angry with’? Such questions are difficult; the use of prepositions is a stumbling block in learning many foreign languages. Still, some prepositions are extremely frequent, and that means that it is sensible to spend some time on learning some central patterns. Also, Norwegian is a language where location and position matters. This shows not only in the posture verbs (cf. 5.3.4.2(b), 5.8.2), but also in prepositional usage. There are more compound prepositions in Norwegian than in English, and they are used more frequently.
Prepositions are not inflected; they are indeclinable. Prepositions can be morphologically simplex, such as i, ‘in’, på, ‘on’, and the most frequent ones are. They can also be morphologically complex, such as utenfor, ‘outside of’, cf. ute and for, innenfra, ‘from the inside’ cf. inne, ‘in’ and fra, ‘from’, cf. 7.4 below and 11.2.2.16. However, the term preposition also commonly covers multi-word units such as i stedet for, ‘in place of’, ‘instead of’, på grunn avlit. ‘on grounds of’, ‘because’. While these are not words, but groups of words, they fulfil the same function as single-word prepositions, and they are dealt with in 7.5 below. Compare Boka blir ferdig om fire uker, ‘The book will be finished in four weeks’ vs. Boka blir ferdig i løpet av fire uker, ‘The book will be finished within four weeks’. Some prepositional word groups can even be discontinuous, e.g. for … siden, ‘ago’: Det var for tre dager siden, ‘That was three days ago’, see 7.5.16.
As their name indicates, prepositions are usually preposed; they are in front of the complement (the phrase they are governing), cf. ved det gamle spisebordet, ‘at the old dining table’.
Sometimes, prepositions can be postposed in Norwegian. This often involves fixed expressions, e.g. oss imellom, ‘between ourselves, between you and me’; Jorden rundt (på åtti dager), ‘Around the world (in 80 days)’, but not necessarily; the construction has some productivity, cf. e.g. aficionados imellom, ‘between aficionados’.
Prepositions can also be found ‘stranded’, long after their complement, in so-called ‘prepositional stranding’, as in Hva tenker du på?, ‘What are you thinking of?’. While prepositional stranding in formal English may raise some eyebrows, it is widely accepted in Norwegian, where, in many cases, the ‘non-stranded’ alternative is less conventional. This holds in particular for hv-questions (10.7.4.2) – På hva tenker du? would seem strange, for example. Also for fronted prepositional objects (prepositional phrases where the preposition belongs particularly closely together with the verb), the ‘non-stranded’ alternative is rare; ‘In God we trust’ may be good English, a Norwegian translation is Gud stoler vi på (or Vi stoler på Gud), never *På Gud stoler vi. Compare also ‘This is the plane with which they travelled’ and Dette er flyet som de reiste med; it would be impossible to put the preposition med immediately before som.
Prepositions ‘govern’ the words following (or, rarely, preceding); syntactically, prepositions are the heads of prepositional phrases. In these phrases, they can be followed by:
In this last case (f), the prepositions have traditionally been called adverbs, and the two classes are sometimes difficult to distinguish, but we stick to more recent analyses on this point.
All prepositions can combine with noun phrases and pronouns. If their complement is a pronoun, it will be in the accusative: Hun ser på meg (not *jeg), ‘She looks at me’, Du ser på henne (not *hun), ‘You look at her’. See 4.2.1.
By contrast, not all prepositions can combine with both infinitives and clauses. Prepositions that do not have a temporal meaning do not combine with a clause. Thus, bak, ‘behind’ does not combine with either clauses or infinitives, because it typically has a spatial meaning only. Conversely, etter, ‘after’ combines with both infinitives and clauses; it has a temporal meaning. Not all temporal prepositions are so general, however; for example, før, ‘before’ can combine with clauses (without an at), but not with infinitives.
| Noun phrase | Clause | Infinitive |
på taket |
stoler på at du går |
tenker på å feire jul |
on the roof |
trusting that you will go |
thinking of celebrating Christmas |
etter jul |
etter at du gikk |
etter å ha tenkt over saken |
after Christmas |
after you left |
after having thought the matter over |
før middag |
før du går |
(none) |
before dinner |
before you leave |
|
bak huset |
(none) |
(none) |
behind the house |
This picture is simplified, however, and some prepositions (e.g. med, uten) are mainly used with other meanings. For glosses and further information on each, cf. 7.2.
The construction of preposition and infinitive/at-clause is thus markedly different from English, as the table above shows. (Norwegian has no gerund, cf. 5.3.1.6, 5.3.2, 5.3.2.3.) In English, one cannot combine prepositions with ‘that’-clauses so freely. However, often inserting ‘the fact’ before ‘that’ will facilitate the translation. Compare: Hun tenker på at han gikk, ‘She thinks about (the fact) that he left’; Hun er sint for at han gikk, ‘She is angry at the fact that he left’.
Note – Many grammars use the label ‘subjunction’ rather than ‘preposition’ in such examples as siden du gikk, innen jeg dør. See also 9.1.4.2.
The delimitation between adverbs and prepositions can be difficult. See also 6.1.2.2.
A number of prepositions are closely related to a word that ends in –e:
inn – inne |
in (for both words) |
|---|---|
ned – nede |
down (for both words) |
opp – oppe |
up (for both words) |
ut – ute |
out (for both words) |
Typically, the word without –e (inn, ned, opp, ut) can govern a following phrase; the word with –e cannot. Thus, ned trappa/veien ‘down the stairs/the road’ is an acceptable Norwegian phrase, while nede cannot govern a following noun (phrase); i.e. it is typically used ‘intransitively’.
The word without –e indicates direction; the word with –e indicates absence of direction. Thus, gå ned can be translated as ‘descend’, gå nede can be translated as ‘walk on a level lower than where we are’, for example.
Note – This holds true also for a number of adverbs. See 6.4.1.1.
Compare:
Since they denote absence of direction, words ending in –e may well combine with være, ‘be’, cf. e.g. Hun er nede, ‘She is down’ (physically or emotionally). The corresponding word without –e denotes direction, and so does not combine with være. Conversely, verbs of motion do not usually combine with words in –e. (Unless the situation is conceptualised from ‘the outside’, as in Han kunne se folk gå der nede på stien, ‘He could see people walking down there on the footpath’).
The relation between words with and without –e holds also for a couple of words that traditionally have not been treated as prepositions, but as adverbs (but recall from 7.2.1 that the distinction is tricky):
fram – framme |
forward |
hjem – hjemme |
home |
Får jeg følge deg hjem? |
Can I follow you home? |
Hjemme var han en tyrann. |
At home, he was a tyrant. |
These prepositions are compounds. They include among others:
From a place |
To a place |
||
bortefra |
away from |
bortover |
across to |
inne(n)fra |
from the inside |
innover |
inwards |
ute(n)fra |
from the outside |
utover |
outwards |
Note – Perhaps unexpectedly, nedenfra, ‘from below’ means the opposite of ned fra, ‘down from’, and ovenfra, ‘from above’ means the opposite of opp fra, ‘up from’.
This preposition, related to English ‘of’, ‘off’, can be used to locate participants with respect to some landmark, cf. Finn gikk av sleden, ‘Finn got off the sled’. While such ‘concrete’ examples are rare with this preposition, they indicate a basic function of av, namely to denote place of origin, source or starting-point. Thus, av can be used to indicate the material which something is made of, e.g. ei fjøl av tre, ‘a board made of wood’; en blanding av sorg og lettelse, ‘a mixture of grief and relief’. Av can signal cause, as in Terry logret av glede, ‘Terry wagged his tail with joy’. (While the wagging is not ‘made of’ joy, it has its origin in joy, as the board has its origin in wood.) Related to the notion of source, av is often found before the ‘agent’ in passives (cf. 5.6.1.1, 10.7.3.3), corresponding to English ‘by’, cf. Oswald ble drept av Ruby, ‘Oswald was killed by Ruby’; Finnegan’s Wake er kjøpt av mange, men lest av få, ‘Finnegan’s Wake has been bought by many, but read by few’. Av can also signal ‘part of’, partitivity (and is also then related to origin or source), as in halvparten av alle nordmenn, ‘half of all Norwegians’.
Like English ‘by’, av can be used to denote permanent properties, as in Knut er blyg av naturen, ‘Knut is shy by nature’; Bjørg er lærer av yrke, ‘Bjørg is a teacher by profession’; like English ‘of’, av can be used to introduce the ‘source’ of an action (sometimes unspecified) in constructions such as Det var fint gjort av deg, ‘That was well done of you’; Det var pent av Ragnhild, ‘That was good of Ragnhild’.
This preposition is mostly used locationally, and usually translates as ‘behind’, cf. Øksa står bak døra, ‘The axe is behind the door’. bak is not used temporally.
This preposition usually translates as ‘among’: Blant de mistenkte er det mange uskyldige, ‘Among the suspects many are innocent’. Note the expression blant annet/andre, ‘among other things/others’: Det er mye godt med Danmark – silda, blant annet, ‘There are many good things about Denmark, – the herring, among other things’. Like English ‘among’, blant is normally followed by a noun (or pronoun) in the plural, not the singular.
Etter, typically translated with ‘after’, can be used locationally, but, like its English counterpart, it will then imply succession: Etter politibilen kom ambulansen, ‘After/Behind the police car came the ambulance’. (In this function, etter can often be replaced by bak ‘behind’: Bak politibilen kom ambulansen.)
In its more common temporal meaning, etter also implies succession, cf. Etter middagen blir det småkaker, ‘After dinner there will be pastries’, and often translates ‘after’ or ‘since’: Etter Guernica var det klart hva som ville komme, ‘After Guernica it was clear what was to come’. Succession, following, is reflected also in that etter can mean ‘according to, by’ – gå etter boka, ‘go by the book’ (follow the rules), evangeliet etter Matteus, ‘the gospel according to Matthew’. Also, there is a kind of ‘incomplete following’ when etter can indicate a longing, a search for, in which case it often translates as English ‘for’: Politi og hjelpemannskap har lett etter de uheldige turistene, ‘Police and rescue teams have been searching for the unfortunate tourists’; Romeos lengsel etter Julie, ‘Romeo’s longing for Juliet’.
This preposition has a multitude of functions, but it is seldom locational, though it can be used when X covers Y, cf. holde en hånd for munnen, ‘keep a hand in front of your mouth’; holde tann for tunge (proverbial) Lit. ‘keep tooth before tongue’, i.e. ‘be silent’. Related to this ‘cover’ meaning is the ‘concealment’ meaning of for, as in Leonore hadde hemmeligheter for kjæresten, ‘Leonore kept secrets from her sweetheart’. Some combinations of for and temporal expressions, e.g. værvarselet for i morgen, ‘the weather forecast for (covering) tomorrow’ and for øyeblikket, ‘for the moment’ are perhaps also relatable to this ‘cover’ meaning.
for most often translates as ‘for’ in English, and it will often mean ‘for the benefit of (directed at)’, as Merlene Ottey løp for Slovenia, ‘Merlene Ottey ran for Slovenia’; mumle for seg selv, ‘mumble to oneself’; et hjem for foreldreløse, ‘a home for orphans’. If X is directed at Y, this often means that Y is taken into consideration, as in some usages with adjectives, cf. Per er stor for alderen, ‘Per is tall for his age’.
for can also mean ‘instead of, in exchange for’ as in Bjørn var reserve for Kjell, ‘Bjørn was a stand-in for Kjell’, and this is quite common with prices, e.g. 90 kroner for en øl, ‘90 crowns for a beer’; noe for noe, ‘quid pro quo’. It can also mean ‘in favour of’ (and is then the opposite of mot, ‘against’), as in Mange amerikanere er veldig mot abort og veldig for dødsstraff, ‘Many Americans are strongly opposed to abortion and strongly in favour of the death penalty’.
The combination for å typically signifies intention (English ‘(in order) to’): Du må knuse noen egg for å få omelett, ‘You have to break eggs (in order) to make an omelette’. Cf. also for at, as in Kokken knuste noen egg for at vi skulle få omelett, ‘The chef cracked some eggs so that we could have an omelette’.
Note 1 – There is also another word (a conjunction) for, indicating cause: Han lo, for hun var så morsom, ‘He laughed, for she was so droll/funny’.
Note 2 – While English uses ‘for’ to signal indirect objects, Norwegian typically uses til: ‘Robert painted a picture for Patty’, Robert malte et bilde til Patty. This is linked to the fact that English uses ‘for’ also followed by the names of specific persons – ‘a gift for Mum’, en gave til mor. Cf. also ‘For somebody so dumb, you are surprisingly smart’, Til å være slik en tosk er du overraskende smart. On the other hand, in some other constructions, Norwegian uses for where English has ‘to’, e.g. to indicate the point of view of a person: For meg ser dette merkelig ut, ‘To me this looks strange’.
This preposition typically translates as ‘in front of’: Traktoren stod foran låven, ‘The tractor was parked in front of the barn’; Foran toget gikk det en elg midt i skinnegangen, ‘In front of the train an elk was walking in the middle of the tracks’.
In its locational sense, this preposition translates as English ‘past’, cf. Vera kjørte forbi åstedet, ‘Vera drove past the crime scene’. Like English ‘past’, it can also have a metaphorical meaning: Alt er forbi, ‘Everything is over’.
This preposition usually translates as ‘before’. Used locationally, it will imply succession: Før ambulansen kom politibilen, ‘Before/In front of the ambulance came the police car’. In its more common, temporal use, før also implies succession: før solnedgang, ‘before sunset’, Før du sovner, ‘Before you fall asleep’ (novel by Linn Ullmann). Used without any complement, før can mean ‘earlier, before’: Det burde vi ha tenkt på før, ‘That we ought to have thought of before’.
In its directional sense, fra translates as ‘from’, and denotes place of origin or ‘source’: Hvalfangerne kom hjem fra Sør-Georgia, ‘The whalers came home from South Georgia’, Fra Narvik går det tog til Kiruna, ‘From Narvik there are trains for Kiruna’. Fra can also be used of source in a less concrete sense: Vi er fra Gerhardsen-epoken, ‘We are from the Gerhardsen era’ (i.e. 1945–1965). In its temporal use, fra also denotes ‘starting-point’, as in I Norge regner vi vikingtida fra 800 til 1000, ‘In Norway we take the Viking Age to be between 800 and 1000’, or ‘origin’, as in Her er ei låt fra 80-tallet, ‘Here is a tune from the 80s’. Similarly, in et smil fra Julie, ‘a smile from Juliet’; en gave fra Moriarty, ‘a gift from Moriarty’, we also find the ‘source’ or ‘origin’ meaning of fra.
Note – While English can use ‘from’ to signify the source material, as in ‘a boat made from wood’, Norwegian cannot – en båt laget av tre (cf. 7.3.1.1).
In combination with some verbs, fra is better translated as ‘out’ or ‘off’: Vi må si fra, ‘We must speak out’; Hun kan ikke komme fra, ‘She cannot get away’, Maskinen er koblet fra, ‘The machine is turned off’.
In its spatial sense, gjennom usually translates as ‘through’; I dag skal vi gå gjennom skogen, ‘Today we shall walk through the woods’; en reise gjennom vakker natur, ‘a journey through beautiful countryside’. gjennom can also be used temporally, as in norsk litteratur gjennom tidene, ‘Norwegian literature through the ages’; Musene klarte seg gjennom vinteren, ‘The mice made it through the winter’. Like English ‘through’, gjennom must then be combined with a phrase indicating a longer period of time (*gjennom klokka 12.00.00 is impossible).
Sometimes, gjennom is used in a more figurative sense, indicating means, cf. gjennom en kombinasjon av bestikkelser, trusler og vold, ‘through (‘by way of’) a combination of bribery, threats and violence’.
This preposition typically locates somebody with somebody else (in the home of the ‘landmark’): Mette er på besøk hos besteforeldrene, ‘Mette is visiting her grandparents (at their place)’, hos Jane, ‘at Jane’s’. Hos may not have a clear-cut English equivalent, but often ‘at’ will do.
This preposition is related to English ‘in’. The highly versatile and frequent preposition i can locate a participant X inside a container-like landmark Y, as in Veden er i uthuset, ‘The fire-wood is in the outhouse’; De er i kirken nå, ‘They are in church now’. In such cases, i usually translates as English ‘in’ (cf. preceding examples), occasionally ‘at, on’ (cf. the following examples): Vennligst betal i kassen, ‘Please pay at the check-out’; Vi satte oss i sofaen, ‘We sat down on the sofa’.
When used temporally, i does not often correspond to English ‘in’, but rather to ‘for’ (cf. 7.6.6): Ola skal arbeide i åtte timer does not mean that Ola will begin work in eight hours’ time, but that he will work for eight hours – i.e. for an eight-hour period. Compare also Vi har vært i Trøndelag i tre uker, ‘We have been in Trøndelag for three weeks’; I hele mitt liv har jeg aldri hørt noe så dumt, ‘In my entire life, I have never heard anything so stupid’. In all these examples, the notion of ‘containment’ is found, as in i dag, ‘today’, i januar, ‘in January’. (Cf. also 7.6.6 on temporal uses).
In some cases where English uses no preposition in temporal usage, Norwegian has i, cf. ‘Monday next week’, mandag i neste uke.
Typically, i will be used if the landmark denotes a period that is perceived as having some duration.
Notice also i used with body parts, as in jeg har vondt i hodetlit. ‘I have pain in the head’, i.e. ‘I’ve got a headache’; hun tok ham i hånda, ‘she took him by the hand’; professoren klødde seg i håret, lit. ‘the professor scratched herself/himself in the hair’, i.e. ‘scratched her/his head’. (In such examples, the use of i implies a fairly solid contact; for a very brief contact, på would be preferred, as that preposition can be used for ‘superficial contact’.
The distinction between i and på ‘at, on’ can be problematic in many cases. See also 7.3.19. Typically, i is used when the landmark is seen as a ‘container’, it is used with ‘volumes’, internally, på when the landmark is seen as a surface or a point, from the outside:
På with surface, point |
I with volume, container |
|---|---|
på veggen |
i skapet |
on the wall |
in the cupboard |
på stolen |
i sofaen |
on the chair |
on the sofa |
på nettet |
i datamaskinen |
on the web |
on the computer |
The choice can involve a difference in meaning:
på landet |
i landet |
|---|---|
in the country(side) |
in the country (e.g. Germany) |
på gården |
i gården |
on the farm |
in the yard |
båten på vannet |
svømmeren i vannet |
the boat on the water |
the swimmer in the water |
hår på brystet |
vondt i brystet |
hair on the chest |
pain in the chest |
et smussmerke på glasset |
vann i glasset |
a dirty mark on the glass |
water in the glass |
This preposition typically translates as ‘with, along with; including’, cf. Der kommer Gullhår med de tre bjørnene, ‘There’s Goldilocks with the three bears’, or ‘by means of’: Han åpnet døra med en hårspenne, ‘He opened the door with a hair pin’; Med vondt skal vondt fordrives (proverb) Lit. ‘With evil, evil is to be driven away’, i.e. ‘You fight fire with fire’. In combination with verbs, there can also be an inclusion sense to med, as in Alle skal med, Lit. ‘Everyone shall with’, i.e. ‘Everybody is to be included’; Hun kom med, ‘She came along/joined in’. Note that the inclusion sense is also found in fra og med 1. januar til og med 31. desember, which includes the dates at either extreme. fra 1. januar could be understood as ‘as of January 2’.
Note – There is also an idiom til og med ‘even’ as in Til og med dr. Watson ble lei av Holmes, ‘Even Dr Watson got fed up with Holmes’. This is not a preposition.
This preposition often translates as ‘between, through’, and it is used in a fairly concrete sense, cf. Ballen gikk mellom beina på målmannen, ‘The ball went through the goalie’s legs’; Mellom Asia og Europa ligger Bosporus-stredet, ‘Between Asia and Europa is the Straits of Bosporus’. It can also be used temporally: Butikken er åpen mellom 10 og 17, ‘The shop is open between 10 and 17’. Notice also mellom oss, ‘between you and me’; mellom barken og veden (lit. between the bark and the wood), ‘between the devil and the deep blue sea’.
This preposition, often translated as ‘towards’ or ‘against’, typically has a sense of movement. mot can locate participants moving towards a landmark, as in Napoleons styrker gikk mot Moskva, ‘Napoleon’s forces went towards Moscow’; Slåsskjempene gikk mot hverandre, ‘The fighters moved towards each other’. There is not always any movement, cf. Kassene stod mot hverandre, ‘The boxes stood against each other’. The meaning ‘sceptical of, negative to’, as in Åslaug var mot norsk EU-medlemskap, ‘Åslaug was against Norwegian EU membership’, is related. In such cases, mot is the opposite of for (cf. 7.3.5.3).
However, confusion can arise in that the directional sense of mot also sometimes indicates an aim: Jonas og Trygve arbeider mot et felles mål, ‘Jonas and Trygve are working towards a common goal/aim’ will normally be understood as saying that Jonas and Trygve are working for the same goal.
This preposition translates as ‘near; close to’: Hotellet ligger nær sentrum, ‘The hotel is close to the centre’; Bilen gjorde nær 200 km/t, ‘The car did almost 120 mph’. It is typically used in a concrete, locational meaning.
This preposition is seldom used spatially, except when meaning ‘via’: De måtte fly om København, ‘They had to fly via Copenhagen’. Om is often used temporally, however, and then translates either as ‘at’, cf. om natta, ‘at night’, or as ‘in’, cf. om en time, ‘in an hour’; om fire dager, ‘in four days’. In the spatial case, om typically combines with definite noun phrases. Om can also signal a topic, as English ‘about’, cf. en artikkel om bunader, ‘an article about/on folk costumes’; en bok om juleskikker, ‘a book about Christmas customs’.
Note – There is also another word om, a subjunction meaning ‘if’ (9.3.2.2): Om jeg var deg …, ‘If I were you…’
While English has a difference between ‘over’ and ‘above’, ‘under’ and ‘below’, there is no such difference in Norwegian. Over typically translates as English ‘over’ or ‘above’, as in Helikopteret svever over rullebanen, ‘The helicopter is hovering over the airfield’; En general er over en korporal, ‘a general is above (ranks above) a corporal’. Like its English counterpart, over can mean ‘past’, cf. Sveriges gullalder var over, ‘Sweden’s Golden Age was over’. As in English, over can mean ‘via, by way of’, as in dra til Fargo over Chicago, ‘go to Fargo via Chicago’. Both in its spatial and its temporal use, over can mean ‘on the other side of’: cf. De bor over elva, ‘They live on the other side of (above) the river’; over helga, ‘after the weekend’.
This very frequent and multi-faceted preposition often corresponds to ‘on’, ‘at’. It typically locates a participant on top of a physical object, at a point or on a surface: Kjelen står på ovnen, ‘The kettle is on the stove’; Fuglene sitter på ledningen, ‘The birds are sitting on the wire’. However, the ‘participant’ may be located on a vertical plane, as in Bildet henger på veggen, ‘The picture is hanging on the wall’, in which case ‘contact’ may be the key point about på.
For some time, på has been taking over some of the ‘territory’ of some other prepositions. Thus, it may now be more common to write på kjøkkenet than i kjøkkenet, ‘in the kitchen’, more common to write lytte på than lytte til, ‘listen to’, på ettermiddagen than om ettermiddagen, ‘in the afternoon’. In such cases, there is usually some tolerance. (After all, Norwegians are used to linguistic variation, cf. Introduction).
Used temporally, på can – in a manner similar to its spatial function – locate an event ‘at a point’, cf. på onsdag, ‘on Wednesday’; på nyttårsaften, ‘on New Year’s Eve’. På does not, therefore, usually combine with a noun denoting a longer period of time, so *på november and *på 1965 are out; the idiomatic preposition is i. på kvelden, ‘in the evening’; på våren, ‘in spring’ are acceptable, but not quite as traditional as om kvelden, om våren (7.3.17).
På can be used with expressions containing measurement, numerical information: ei jente på ti år, ‘a girl of ten’; lønn på 180000 (kroner), ‘a wage of 180,000 (kroner)’; et skip på 100000 tonn, ‘a ship of 100,000 tons’.
På is not infrequently used to signal ‘belonging’, comparable to English ‘of’, cf. taket på huset, ‘the roof of the house’; halen på ulven, ‘the tail of the wolf’ (see also 1.8.1.6, 7.7.3.5). What belongs to X is often also a quality or characteristic of X, and på is common after nouns denoting quality or characteristic, such as fargen på øynene, ‘the colour of her/his eyes’; størrelsen på skoene, ‘the size of the shoes’; smaken på suppa, ‘the taste of the soup’.
På can often combine with noun phrases of manner: på den måten, på det viset, ‘in that way’.
In combination with verbs of physical contact, på often indicates a more superficial, briefer kind of contact (since an object then is reduced to a point, as it were). Thus, there is a difference between Gry løftet sekken, ‘Gry lifted the sack’ and Gry løftet på sekken. If the lifting is complete and successful (say, if Gry is lifting the sack high above the ground and holding it there for a long time), the expression with på is unlikely. If the lifting is incomplete, say, Gry managed to lift the sack only for a short time, or lifted it off the ground only to move it a few centimetres further along the floor, the expression with på is more likely. Compare Christine tok Øystein og gikk, ‘Christine took Øystein and left’; and Christine tok på Øystein og gikk, ‘Christine touched Øystein and left’. Only the former implies that Christine had ‘control’ of Øystein, in some sense, and that he went along (or even was carried along); only the latter implies superficial touching.
Note – The effect of adding på after a verb may sometimes be comparable to that of the progressive aspect in English. Compare Knut leste boka ferdig, ‘Knut read the book through’ vs. Knut leste på ei bok, ‘Knut was reading a book’; *Knut leste på ei bok ferdig is simply not grammatical.
In a number of cases, på will be translated by ‘in’: på landet, ‘in the countryside’; på hotellet, ‘in the hotel’; på soverommet, ‘in the bedroom’. Some of these combinations are fixed, one cannot say i landet in Norwegian meaning ‘in the countryside’. Sometimes, however, a different conceptualisation, a different point of view, will lead to choosing another preposition, even if the ‘meaning’ otherwise may seem unchanged.
Compare: Vi er på badet, ‘We are in the bathroom’ vs. Vi er i badet, which can mean not only ‘We are in the bathroom’, but perhaps even more likely ‘We are in the bath (i.e. bath-tub)’. With i, the point of view is more ‘internal’, ‘inside’ a container.
Many nouns denoting institutions typically combine with på (på skolen, på sjukehuset, på universitetet), but not all (i kirken, i banken), and sometimes there is variation (i/på radioen). (For translations, see 7.3.19.6).
The division of labour between i and på can be tricky, cf. also 7.3.12.4, but in the typical case, i is used with ‘containers’, på with ‘points and surfaces’. Thus, the names of larger Norwegian cities typically take i (i Bergen, i Oslo), while smaller, and thus more ‘point-like’, towns (especially inland) can combine with på (på Hamar, på Kongsvinger). In the latter case, however, there is again some variability depending on conceptualisation (cf. 7.3.19.5); compare Vi skal møtes på Kongsvinger, ‘We’ll meet in Kongsvinger’ vs. En venn av meg bor i den fineste gamle trevillaen i hele Kongsvinger, ‘A friend of mine lives in the finest old wooden villa in all Kongsvinger’. In the former case, Kongsvinger is conceptualised as a point, in the latter as a ‘container’.
However, this only applies to the names of towns and cities in Norway. Names of towns outside Norway are always preceded by i, even if they are small (i Kineton, i Charlottenberg). For other geographical locations, the main rule applies; i is used if the landmark is seen as a ‘container’, as districts and countries usually are, cf. i Sussex, ‘in Sussex’; i Belgia, ‘in Belgium’, whereas på is used with points and surfaces, på Zürich-sjøen, ‘on Lake Zürich’. Islands are conceived of as ‘points’, e.g. på Island, ‘in Iceland’; på Grønland, ‘in Greenland’, but exceptions occur if they are very large and nations in themselves, cf. i Australia. Compare i Europa, ‘in Europe’ vs. på Kontinentet, ‘on the Continent’.
Names of rivers, also abroad, can be subject to the same kind of variation (in line with the main rule) as in the Kongsvinger example. If conceptualised as surfaces, they can combine with på, if conceptualised as containers with i:
Note also the following examples:
Either i or på: butikken ‘the shop’; kjøkkenet, ‘the kitchen’; teateret, ‘the theatre’; soverommet, ‘the bedroom’ – English ‘at, in’
Perhaps confusingly, names of regions in Norway combine with på if they end in –landet (or –rike, –møre, cf. på Sørlandet, på Ringerike, på Sunnmøre). Other names of regions tend to combine with i (i Trøndelag, i Nord-Norge, i Valdres). With street names, we usually find i, cf. i Storgata, ‘on the main street’, i Trondheimsveien.
In some cases, på contrasts with av (cf. English ‘on/off’), cf. slå på radioen, ‘switch the radio on’; slå av radioen, ‘switch the radio off’.
This preposition often translates as ‘around’: rundt hjørnet, ‘around the corner’. Like English ‘around’, it can also have the meaning ‘–ish’, ‘roughly’: Hun sang i rundt ti minutter, ‘She sang for roughly ten minutes’.
In its simple locational sense, til denotes a direction and corresponds to English ‘to’. Cf. Vi dro til Oslo, ‘We went to Oslo’; toget til Bergen, ‘the train to Bergen’. In this case, til is so to speak the counterpart of fra, indicating not a starting-point, but an end-point.
til is often used to signal possession, comparable to English ‘of’ (cf. 7.7): Der er huset til Roald og Eva ‘There is the house of Roald and Eva’. Thus: Dette er synspunktene til Putinlit. ‘These are the views/points of view to Putin’ is most naturally interpreted as ‘these are Putin’s views, not ‘these are the views to be presented to Putin’. In these two examples, til could be replaced by –s (Roald og Evas hus, Putins synspunkter, cf. 1.8.1), but this would be less natural if we are dealing with non-human ‘possessors’, especially if they are not expressed by proper names, e.g. buret til papegøyen, ‘the parrot’s cage’. (Papegøyens bur is possible, but very formal.)
In temporal expressions, til will often mean ‘until, till, ‘by’’: De danset til sola rant, ‘They danced till the sun went up’, or ‘before’: Dette må være gjort til fredag, ‘This must be done by/before Friday’. As in its spatial function, temporal til has the meaning of end-point. Therefore, til fredag may be interpreted as ‘before Friday’; contrast the quite unequivocal Butikken har oppe til og med fredag, ‘The shop is open up to and including Friday’ (cf. 7.3.13, 7.6.13).
Related to its directional sense, til can mean ‘made for’: utstyr til trening, ‘equipment for training’; fisk til middag, ‘fish for dinner’; til å bli gal/kvalm av, ‘so as to drive you mad/make you queasy’.
While English distinguishes between ‘over’ and ‘above’, ‘under’ and ‘below’, there is no such difference in Norwegian (cf. 7.3.18); under will typically correspond to either ‘under’ or ‘below’. Cf. Hunden ligger under bordet, ‘The dog is lying under the table’; Alt er vel under dekk, ‘All is well below deck’.
Under is not often used temporally, but it can be used in the sense of ‘during’, cf. under møtet, ‘during the meeting’; under krigen, ‘during the war’.
This preposition will usually translate as English ‘out’, but English ‘out’ can also be translated as ute, cf. 7.2.2.1. Kari gikk ut døra, ‘Kari went out of the door’. It can also be used temporally: Billetten gjelder ut januar, ‘The ticket is valid throughout January’ (i.e. until February).
The locational sense of ved roughly translates as ‘by’, ‘at the side of, next to’. Compare Hammerfest ligger ved Nordishavet, ‘Hammerfest is situated on the Arctic Ocean’; Han stod ved hennes side, ‘He stood by her side’; De satte seg ved bordet, ‘They sat down at the table’.
Ved is also used in some temporal expressions, typically not very precise ones, e.g. ved midnatt, ‘at midnight’; ved sjutida, ‘around seven’. The meaning of close approximation is also found in some locational uses, such as Kari traff rett ved målet, ‘Kari hit past the goal/target’, which means that Kari did not score, but she came close. Note also ved denne anledningen, ‘on this occasion’.
Ved can also be used to signal means, instrument: Han ble valgt ved å appellere til folks verste instinkter, ‘He was elected by appealing to people’s worst instincts’; Han skadet sin egen sak ved at han alltid var så uhøflig, ‘He damaged his own cause through always being so impolite’. Cf. also ved hjelp av ‘by means of’ – Ved hjelp av en hårnål åpnet Askepott dørlåsen, ‘By means of a hairpin Cinderella opened the lock’ (7.5.14).
Note – There are some dialects where med is used more at the expense of ved (and vice versa).
Unlike their English counterparts, Norwegian prepositions form compounds frequently. For example, bak, ‘behind’ and på, ‘on’ can form a compound preposition bakpå, as in Bakpå sykkelen satt jeg, ‘At the back of the bicycle, I sat’; inn, ‘in’ and med, ‘with’ can form a compound preposition innmed, as in Buster ligger innmed ovnen, ‘Buster lies near the oven’. In fact, the majority of Norwegian prepositions are morphologically compound. They open for a quite nuanced description of the location of an object by means of a single word. Compare for example Pakka ligger bakpå sykkelen,‘The package is at the back of and on top of the bicycle’; Hunden ligger bakmed sykkelen, ‘The dog lies behind and close to the bicycle’; Hunden ligger innmed sykkelen, ‘The dog lies close to the bicycle’; Kniven lå innunder sykkelen, ‘The knife was close to and under the bicycle’; Heroinet var inni sykkelen, ‘The heroin was in/within the bicycle’.
Note – Norwegian has a relatively fine-calibre system for specifying location and position. The compound prepositions support this, as does the differentiation inn – inne, etc. 7.2.2.1. Also, Norwegians use verbs of position and posture extensively (5.3.4.2(b), 5.8.2).
Many compound prepositions have a fairly ‘concrete’ meaning, and the group of compound prepositions is large. However, many of them are infrequent (a case in point being bakpå), perhaps more so in writing than in speech (e.g. innmed is rare in writing). This grammar concentrates on writing and on frequent patterns, so we deal briefly with the compound prepositions. A couple of groups merit special mention, though.
These include gjennom vs. igjennom, blant vs. iblant, mellom vs. imellom, fra vs. ifra, mot vs. imot. On the whole, there is little significant difference in meaning between the members of each pair. For example, fra and ifra are often interchangeable. Vi kommer ifra Oslo, ‘We are coming from Oslo’ can be replaced by Vi kommer fra Oslo with little (if any) change of meaning.
However, if the complement is preposed (cf. 7.1.3.2), the word beginning with i– has to be used. Thus, one can write mellom venner, ‘between friends’ or imellom venner, but only venner imellom, not *venner mellom. Also, there is a tendency to use the word beginning with i– if the preposition has no complement. Thus, whereas there is no clear preference in Hun gikk i/gjennom isen, ‘She went through the ice’, there is a preference for Hun gikk igjennom, although Hun gikk gjennom is also acceptable.
These include innenfor ‘within’; utenfor ‘outside’; østenfor ‘to the east of’; sønnenfor, ‘to the south of’ and others. These prepositions usually have a moderately ’transparent’ meaning. Thus, innenfor relates to innen, ‘within’ and for, ‘for’, but it hardly ever means anything approaching for; sometimes, however, it can overlap in meaning with innen. Compare Innen/Innenfor Høyre er meningene delte, ‘Within the Conservative Party, opinions are divided’, Dette må bli gjort innen/*innenfor 48 timer, ‘This must be done within 48 hours’.
Note – As an alternative to –en–, –a– can be found, i.e. innafor, utafor, are possible, but this is rare in writing.
Multi-word prepositions are units that function fairly similarly to single-word prepositions. English examples include ‘in spite of’, ‘in the course of’. Below are fifteen such highly frequent units in Norwegian (7.5.1–7.5.15). Their semantics is not as intricate as that of the simplex prepositions, so we deal with them more briefly.
This phrase typically occurs after the verb være, ‘be’:
This particular construction is often used where English would use a gerund:
This complex preposition is fairly formal.
Note – This particular phrase has perhaps become too popular in Norwegian in recent years; there is even a derogatory term ‘(i)forholdisme’, used to criticize its over-use, as in Her er informasjon i forhold til pris, ‘Here is information about price’, more traditionally Her er informasjon om pris.
This complex preposition is fairly formal.
Note – An alternative version of this particular phrase is a simplex istedenfor (written in one word). Notice also the ‘intransitive’ in examples like Vi valgte torsk i stedet, ‘We chose cod instead’.
Note the ‘intransitive’ in e.g. Jeg tar brød i tillegg, ‘I’ll have bread on the side’.
This particular multi-word unit is formal. Less formal ways of expressing the last example would be På grunn av luftforurensningen i Oslo … or Fordi det er luftforurensning i Oslo …
Note – ‘In spite of’ can also translate as På tross av or Trass i. Notice also Tross alt, ‘despite everything’, which is much used.
There are some discontinuous prepositional word groups, sometimes called ‘parenthetical’, because they enclose the complement. These include the following two used temporally:
There are also cases where two prepositions, conjoined, have a meaning worth noting. These include fra og med (7.3.13), til og med (7.3.13), and:
Prepositional usage is often easier, relatively speaking, with ‘concrete’ locational meanings. Prepositions are frequently also used with temporal meanings (7.1.1.2), however, and these are often perceived as more difficult by learners. So, we shall compare English and Norwegian here. Sections 7.1–7.5 had Norwegian prepositions as their starting-point; in this section, we take English as our point of departure. Only temporal meanings are discussed. In section 7.7, we look at another classical problem, viz. how to translate English ‘of’. (For a third difficulty, the distinction between i and på, see 7.3.12.4 and 7.3.19.6.)
In its temporal use, English ‘after’ typically translates as Norwegian etter:
after lunch |
etter lunsj |
|---|---|
after the war |
etter krigen |
In its temporal use, English ‘around’ often translates as Norwegian rundt (cf. 7.3.20):
around midnight |
rundt midnatt |
|---|---|
They will be here around four. |
De skal være her rundt fire. |
|
(An alternative is often omkring.) |
|
In some cases, when English ‘at’ combines with a specific point of time, no preposition is needed in Norwegian:
at twelve o’clock |
klokka tolv |
|---|---|
at exactly one o’clock |
nøyaktig klokka ett |
Note the following translations:
at the moment |
for øyeblikket |
|---|---|
at midday |
ved middagstider |
at night |
om kvelden/om natta |
at that time |
på den tida |
at this time |
på denne tida |
at this stage |
på dette stadiet |
(For ‘at’ in locational uses and the distinction på/i, cf. 7.3.12.4 and 7.3.19.6.)
Used temporally, English ‘between’ typically translates as Norwegian mellom:
between 2 and 4 p.m. |
mellom 14 og 16 |
English ‘during’ can usually be translated i løpet av (7.5.7), sometimes with i as a possible alternative:
When followed by a noun that includes in its meaning an extended period of time, under may be a viable alternative in Norwegian:
Using under is not possible before a quantifying expression, unless it is used in the entirely different meaning of ‘less than’, in which case another preposition is also used:
English ‘for’ can be used when temporal duration is intended; how long something has lasted. In such cases, i is common in Norwegian:
However, when the sentence contains the negation ikke, ‘not’ (or a word similar in meaning such as knapt, ‘barely’; aldri, ‘never’), i is rarely used, på often is:
When the period of time is conceived of as more ‘point-like’, ‘for’ often translates as for:
for the first time |
for første gang |
|---|---|
a room for the night |
et rom for natta |
This may be related to the ‘cover’ meaning of for, cf. 7.3.5.
Note – for Christmas |
til jul |
Often, this preposition translates as fra, also in its temporal meaning:
English ‘in’ can be used when something is going to happen in the future, and then translates into Norwegian as om:
However, English ‘in’ can also be combined with nouns to describe the duration of events, typically with quantifying expressions. In such cases, på is often used in Norwegian (and om never is):
See also 7.3.19.2.
Note the difference between på en time and i en time:
Kari gjorde lekser i en time. |
Kari did homework for an hour. |
While Kari gjorde lekser i en time does not imply that the action of doing homework is completed, Jane gjorde leksene på en time implies that the homework was completed (the landmark is conceived of as a point).
When referring to a specific period in the past, ‘in’ often translates as på:
in the 90s |
på 90-tallet |
|---|---|
in those days |
på den tida |
Note the combination with seasons and months:
in autumn, in spring |
om høsten, om våren |
|---|---|
in July |
i juli |
When combined with names of days, ‘on’ typically translates as på:
never on a Sunday |
aldri på en søndag |
(For ‘on’ in locational uses and the distinction på/i, cf. 7.3.12 and 7.3.19.)
When English ‘on’ is used with dates, Norwegian often has no preposition:
Though på can be used:
If English ‘over’ is used with a phrase specifying duration, Norwegian will often use i:
With the meaning ‘through’, Norwegian can have gjennom (7.3.10):
The English word ‘over’ can also be used in the sense of ‘more than’, in which case it typically translates as Norwegian over:
If ‘past’ combines with a specific point of time, Norwegian uses over:
It’s five past four. |
Klokka/den er fem over fire. |
(See 3.6.1 on telling the time)
If there is no complement, Norwegian can also use forbi:
Those days are past. |
Den tida er forbi/over. |
Often, this preposition translates as siden:
With nouns denoting events, etter may be more common in Norwegian:
When used temporally, English ‘through’ often translates as gjennom, especially if followed by a plural noun (phrase), cf.
through the ages |
gjennom tidene |
If the noun phrase following is in the singular, i løpet av (7.5.7) is often a better translation, cf. ‘through this last year’ i løpet av dette siste året.
Note that where American English uses ‘through’ to mean ‘up to and including’, Norwegian uses til og med, cf. 7.3.13.
This preposition usually translates as til:
Please stay till Monday. |
Vær så snill å bli til mandag. |
|---|---|
Jane waited until Tarzan woke up. |
Jane ventet til Tarzan |
våknet. |
With specific points of time, ‘to’ will often translate as på (cf. 3.6 on telling time):
It’s five to four. |
Klokka/den er fem på fire. |
Note the expressions:
today, tomorrow |
i dag, i morgen |
When used with landmarks of time, ‘towards’ will usually translate as mot:
towards the end of the vacation |
mot slutten av ferien |
English may use the word ‘a’ in expressions of frequency. This may not be a preposition, but its Norwegian translations are. Often, a viable (if perhaps slightly formal) equivalent is per, cf. ‘eight times a day’; åtte ganger per dag, ‘seven days a week’; sju dager per uke. If per is used, the noun following has to be indefinite. If other prepositions are used, the noun has to be definite: Åtte ganger om dagen, sju dager i uka. In such cases, om can be used with dagen, ‘the day’ or natta, ‘the night’, while i will be the usual choice for many other periods of time, cf. åtte ganger i døgnet, ‘eight times every 24 hours’; tre ganger i minuttet, ‘three times a minute’.
Note the following expressions:
today |
i dag |
yesterday |
i går |
tomorrow |
i morgen |
the day before yesterday |
i forgårs |
in a week |
om ei uke |
next week |
(i) neste uke |
next autum |
neste høst, til høsten |
The word neste is just as confusing as English ‘next’.
this afternoon |
i ettermiddag |
this morning |
i morges |
tonight |
i kveld |
in the morning |
om morgenen |
at night |
om natta |
in the evenings |
om kveldene, på kveldene |
on Wednesday |
på onsdag |
during the weekend |
i helga |
the weekend (to come) |
til helga |
in the 20th century |
i det 20. århundre, |
på 1900-tallet |
|
in 2011 |
i 2011 |
There are many possible translations of English ‘of’. They include using:
The –s genitive, cf. 1.8.1.1. Such cases typically involve relations of possession:
Frankrikes historie |
the history of France |
|---|---|
Sovjetunionens leder |
the leader of the Soviet Union |
kjærlighetens makt |
the power of love |
Compound noun, often used with ‘part-of’ relations between inanimates:
bordbeinet |
the leg of the table |
|---|---|
hustaket |
the roof of the house |
artikkelforfatteren |
the author of the article |
Unlike the examples in 7. 7.1, we cannot say that the table ‘possesses’ the leg or the house the roof. A compound can also often be used when the English ‘landmark’ denotes a material:
a house of cards |
et korthus |
Av can be used when the landmark denotes material or origin (7.3.1.1):
pilspisser laget av stein |
arrowheads made of stone |
|---|---|
født av britiske foreldre |
born of British parents |
Av can also be used when there is a part-whole (partitive) relation involved; sometimes also with relations of possession:
et flertall av velgerne |
a majority of the voters |
|---|---|
store deler av Norge |
large parts of Norway |
eieren av hytta |
the owner of the cabin |
When English ‘of’ is combined with a landmark denoting geographical origin and the preceding noun is not a title, Norwegian will usually have fra (7.3.9):
trollmannen fra Oz |
the wizard of Oz |
|---|---|
rottefangeren fra Hameln |
the pied piper of Hamelin |
I is often used when the ‘landmark’ denotes a field of knowledge:
en professor i norsk |
a professor of Norwegian |
|---|---|
kunnskaper i grammatikk |
knowledge of grammar |
I is also used if the landmark is a place-name and the ‘participant’ has some permanent function, some title, in that place:
statsministeren i Belgia |
the prime minister of Belgium |
Over is often used when the preceding noun is some kind of collection of knowledge, such as a list, a map, a survey:
en liste over Norges monarker |
a list of Norway’s monarchs |
|---|---|
et kart over Frankrike |
a map of France |
en oversikt over terriere |
a survey of terriers |
På is often used with numerical information (cf. 7.3.19.3):
en lønn på 500 000 |
a salary of 500 000 |
|---|---|
en forsinkelse på to døgn |
a delay of two days and nights |
På is often used to denote visible relations between objects or concrete participants:
taket på huset |
the roof of the house |
|---|---|
mannskapet på Apollo 13 |
the crew of Apollo 13 |
Til is often found when the ‘landmark’ denotes people, and there may be a relation of possession (cf. also 7.3.21.2, 7.7.1 and 7.7.3.1):
mora til barnet |
the mother of the child |
|---|---|
huset til en venn |
the house of a friend |
However, til can also be used in some other cases, sometimes when English can use ‘leading up to’:
årsaken til ulykken |
the cause of the accident |
In some cases where English uses ‘of’, Norwegian uses no preposition or other grammatical word. This is often the case with quantifying expressions (1.5.4):
en kopp te |
a cup of tea |
|---|---|
fem kilo poteter |
five kilos of potatoes |
et stort antall feil |
a large number of mistakes |
alle innbyggerne |
all of the inhabitants |
It is also typically the case when English ‘of’ is followed by a place-name:
byen Drammen |
the town of Drammen |
|---|---|
Kongedømmet Danmark |
the kingdom of Denmark |
Nord-Norge |
the north of Norway |
(Note that the last example also involves compounding.)
Note also the absence of preposition with times, dates, months: