# Norwegian: skal kunne



## ajvanho

I need someone to confirm the meaning of "skal kunne".
I think it means "to be able to",for example:

Jeg skal kunne prate med vennen min,når jeg har lært norsk.

I will be able to talk with my friend when I have learned norwegian.

Am I right or wrong?Takker for svarer!


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Since 'kan' indicates ability combined with 'skal' which indicates intent, the sentence becomes somewhat hypothetical: "I intend to be able to speak Norwegian with my friend once I have learned Norwegian". There is a very strong modality in the auxiliary verbs in Norwegian, so very often you can skip the main verb and rely on the meaning of the auxiliary verb alone. In this case I suggest: "Jeg skal prate med vennen min når jeg har lært norsk" (I intend to talk to my friend once I have learned Norwegian).


----------



## ajvanho

Nevertheless,there are many emaxples of "skal kunne" usage on the web:
Musikk jeg skal kunne synge,
Video _skal kunne_ ses på mobilen,
brukerne skal kunne ha kontroll,
dammene skal kunne gå toppløse,
and that is why I want to know the exact meaning(s) of it.How would you translate some of these sentences?


----------



## sendintheclowns

ajvanho said:


> I need someone to confirm the meaning of "skal kunne".
> I think it means "to be able to",for example:
> 
> Jeg skal kunne prate med vennen min,når jeg har lært norsk.
> 
> I will be able to talk with my friend when I have learned norwegian.
> 
> Am I right or wrong?Takker for svarer!



Doesn't "skal kunne" mean more like "should be able to"? In other words, it seems to imply a certain amount of uncertainty although there is intent: 

"Jeg skal kunne prate med vennen min..." = "I should be able to talk with my friend..." (I want to, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to)  
"Video skal kunne ses på mobilen" = you *should* be able to watch video on your mobile (but you might not) 

Of course there is also "skulle kunne", which seems to imply even more uncertainty (and maybe even a lack of intent). 

"Man skulle kunne gjøre det." = One should be able to do it (but one might not).


----------



## NorwegianNYC

sendintheclowns said:


> Doesn't "skal kunne" mean more like "should be able to"? In other words, it seems to imply a certain amount of uncertainty although there is intent:
> 
> "Jeg skal kunne prate med vennen min..." = "I should be able to talk with my friend..." (I want to, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to)
> "Video skal kunne ses på mobilen" = you *should* be able to watch video on your mobile (but you might not)
> 
> Of course there is also "skulle kunne", which seems to imply even more uncertainty (and maybe even a lack of intent).
> 
> "Man skulle kunne gjøre det." = One should be able to do it (but one might not).



Yes, exactly. Since both 'skal' and 'kan' are modalities, they create an ambiguous statement. If you say: _jeg skal snakke norsk_ you are expressing you intent to speak Norwegian, whereas _jeg kan snakke norsk_ is the ability to speak Norwegian. Therefore, the combination 'kan' + 'skal' will have an element of uncertainty since it can be interpreted: "intend to be able to" (or as you say: "should be able to")


----------



## ajvanho

I think I understand now.But I think the "video" sentence should be translated: "video should be able to be seen on the mobile", since the verb "ses" is in passive voice.


----------



## sendintheclowns

ajvanho said:


> I think I understand now.But I think the "video" sentence should be translated: "video should be able to be seen on the mobile", since the verb "ses" is in passive voice.



Yes, you're absolutely right. That makes a very awkward sentence in English, though.


----------



## ajvanho

Helt enig


----------



## ajvanho

Hi again,
Yesterday,while I was browsing through a norwegian forum,I stumbled upon both "må kunne" and "vil kunne".
Since "skal kunne" stands for "should be able to", it seems logical to me that "må kunne" should mean
"must be able to",while "vil kunne" stands for ...well I just don't know.I would translate it as "will be able to" in most cases,but then again
there are so many instances when it does not feel appropriate.For example:
1. Norge vil kunne anerkjenne en palestinsk stat.
1. Norway could recognize a palestinian state.(Seems better than "Norway will be able to recognize a palestinian state).

2. Spørsmålene du må kunne besvare.
2. The questions you must be able to answer ( you must know how to answer ).This is of course my version of translation.

Could anyone explain this to me cause it's really giving  me a headache.thanks a lot.Takk skal dere ha.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Hi!

I know this must sound like technicalities, but there is a point here.

The sentence: _Norge vil kunne anerkjenne en palestinsk stat _has the modalities 'vil' (= intent) and 'kan' (=ability), and really says: "Norway intends to be able to recognize a Palestinian state!" This again (in plain English) says what you say above "Norway could recognize a Palestinian state".

The sentence: _Spørsmålene du må kunne besvare_. has the modalities 'må' (= prescription, command) and 'kan' (= ability), so you translation: "The questions you must be able to answer" is correct


----------



## ajvanho

Wouldn't it be better to say:Norge har til hensikt å anerkjenne en palestinsk stat,instead of:Norge vil kunne...osv.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Absolutely - I was simply exploring the modal auxiliary verbs in the situation


----------



## ajvanho

Ok.Takk for hjelpen.Det var snilt av deg.


----------

