# Norwegian: you are - a miracle, which lights up the way



## Rokuruta

Hi 
I'm making a gift to my friend, for whom I wrote these lines. She's Norwegian, and I really want to surprise her with it. But I don't really trust no translators, so if anyone speaking the language can help me out translating it, I'd be reeeeally appreciated!!

Here it is: 

*Just like the northern lights, which shine at night in the sea of stars, you are - a miracle, which lights up the way for people around.*



_Also, if you guys have any suggestions on how to make it sound better - please, share your thoughts._

Thank you!!!


----------



## Sepia

Rokuruta said:


> Hi
> I'm making a gift to my friend, for whom I wrote these lines. She's Norwegian, and I really want to surprise her with it. But I don't really trust no translators, so if anyone speaking the language can help me out translating it, I'd be reeeeally appreciated!!
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> *Just like the northern lights, which shine at night in the sea of stars, you are - a miracle, which lights up the way for people around.*
> 
> 
> 
> _Also, if you guys have any suggestions on how to make it sound better - please, share your thoughts._
> 
> Thank you!!!


A mod will probably tell you that we don't do that unless you make the first try yourself, if I am not mistaken. So you may as well do that at once, I think.


----------



## Rokuruta

Sepia said:


> A mod will probably tell you that we don't do that unless you make the first try yourself, if I am not mistaken. So you may as well do that at once, I think.


I mean... I'm not sure I can. I do not speak Norwegian at all. I just wanted people who know the language to help me out with it. If I knew it, I wouldn't ask. If this is the mandatory rule here, I can just translate it in google, but what's the point then? 😕


----------



## Sepia

Rokuruta said:


> I mean... I'm not sure I can. I do not speak Norwegian at all. I just wanted people who know the language to help me out with it. If I knew it, I wouldn't ask. If this is the mandatory rule here, I can just translate it in google, but what's the point then? 😕



Your decision. Basically what you are asking is a service that would normally cost at least 30 EUR - 0.60 to 4.00 EUR per line, plus a base fee. Some people try to trick nice foreros to do a complete translation for them by feeding them the lines bit, by bit, in different posts, and are probably themselves charging a similar fee for the translation. So why would anyone do that?
That is one thing.
The other thing is that - if you take a look at the topics in other threads, you'öö see that - it is all about getting better at the languages we actively use or are about to learn.


----------



## Rokuruta

Sepia said:


> Your decision. Basically what you are asking is a service that would normally cost at least 30 EUR - 0.60 to 4.00 EUR per line, plus a base fee. Some people try to trick nice foreros to do a complete translation for them by feeding them the lines bit, by bit, in different posts, and are probably themselves charging a similar fee for the translation. So why would anyone do that?
> That is one thing.
> The other thing is that - if you take a look at the topics in other threads, you'öö see that - it is all about getting better at the languages we actively use or are about to learn.


I see. Thank you so much for the explanation. It is totally my fault and misunderstanding of this website main idea then. 

But since I'm really in a need of a speaker advice, I'll research each word of the phrase, how they work with each other, and get back here shortly. 

An effort for an effort 🙂. And even thought I'd do it for free to anyone asking, I fully understand that it's not how the world works. Thanks again!


----------



## Rokuruta

*Just like the northern lights, which shine at night in the sea of stars, you are - a miracle, which lights up the way for people around.

Akkurat som nordlyset, som skinner om natten (i stjernehavet) (i havet av stjerner), er du - et mirakel, som lyser opp veien for folk rundt.*

*Akkurat* (just) *som* (like) *nordlysET* - Just like the Northern lights. 
"Northern lights" (aka Aurora, aka the polar lights, aka polarlys as it says in norsk) is a noun, so there shall be an article THE before it, just like in English. But since in norsk there's no article in front of the noun in the definite form, I have to add ET at the end of the noun (Aurora is a neuter word, so it's not EN or EI). It has to be nordlysET. 

*Som* (in this context - which) *skinner* (shine + ing suffix = skinne+ER = skinnER) *om natten* (at night) *i stjernehavet* (literally - Stjerne - star, havET (+ET because of THE) the sea - havET)) - in the star sea. 

But there's another option I found for "in the sea of stars" - *I havet* (havET because of an article THE) *av* (of) *stjerner* (stjern - star, but since I need a pural - stjernER - starS). Please, let me know which one sounds better...

*Er du et mirakel* - you are a miracle, easy as that. 

*Som* (which) *lyser opp* (lights up. Unlike in English, where you have to add S at the end of a verb in a third-person singular (it light - it lights) you can't do the same in norsk, I guess. True?)) *veiEN* (vei - way, veiEN - the way. I'm not sure why it's EN and not ET at the end. Probably because in norsk WAY is a masculine word, meaning it has to be EN, not ET.) 

*for folk rundt* - for people around.

Went thought 15 translators, choosing the best options. Then used some websites to learn the grammar, look behind the scenes. Pretty sure I missed something, but overall I really enjoyed researching. Not sure if Sepia reads it, but I'm really glad he made me do this, this language is amazing, I had fun. 

At the end, I like how it turned out. It's no longer a simple, straight forward translation, but a phrase with something behind it. Some understanding, ability to brake it apart and explain why it is so and why it isn't. 
Sooo... yeah. I'd still be infinitely appreciated if anyone who speak the language help me out. At least with choosing the two sentences in the middle. 

Thank you!


----------



## winenous

Rokuruta said:


> If this is the mandatory rule here, I can just translate it in google, but what's the point then?


I think some people do precisely that, and then ask for comments on the translation. 

I'm not Norwegian, but from what I know of the language Google does not do too bad a job on your sentence if that is any help. It is certainly understandable, but personally I'd drop the "-" from the translated version. Hope that helps


----------



## Rokuruta

winenous said:


> I think some people do precisely that, and then ask for comments on the translation.
> 
> I'm not Norwegian, but from what I know of the language Google does not do too bad a job on your sentence if that is any help. It is certainly understandable, but personally I'd drop the "-" from the translated version. Hope that helps


It sure does! Thanks man!


----------



## winenous

Rokuruta said:


> *Just like the northern lights, which shine at night in the sea of stars, you are - a miracle, which lights up the way for people around.
> 
> Akkurat som nordlyset, som skinner om natten (i stjernehavet) (i havet av stjerner), er du - et mirakel, som lyser opp veien for folk rundt.*
> 
> *Akkurat* (just) *som* (like) *nordlysET* - Just like the Northern lights.
> "Northern lights" (aka Aurora, aka the polar lights, aka polarlys as it says in norsk) is a noun, so there shall be an article THE before it, just like in English. But since in norsk there's no article in front of the noun in the definite form, I have to add ET at the end of the noun (Aurora is a neuter word, so it's not EN or EI). It has to be nordlysET.
> 
> *Som* (in this context - which) *skinner* (shine + ing suffix = skinne+ER = skinnER) *om natten* (at night) *i stjernehavet* (literally - Stjerne - star, havET (+ET because of THE) the sea - havET)) - in the star sea.
> 
> But there's another option I found for "in the sea of stars" - *I havet* (havET because of an article THE) *av* (of) *stjerner* (stjern - star, but since I need a pural - stjernER - starS). Please, let me know which one sounds better...
> 
> *Er du et mirakel* - you are a miracle, easy as that.
> 
> *Som* (which) *lyser opp* (lights up. Unlike in English, where you have to add S at the end of a verb in a third-person singular (it light - it lights) you can't do the same in norsk, I guess. True?)) *veiEN* (vei - way, veiEN - the way. I'm not sure why it's EN and not ET at the end. Probably because in norsk WAY is a masculine word, meaning it has to be EN, not ET.)
> 
> *for folk rundt* - for people around.
> 
> Went thought 15 translators, choosing the best options. Then used some websites to learn the grammar, look behind the scenes. Pretty sure I missed something, but overall I really enjoyed researching. Not sure if Sepia reads it, but I'm really glad he made me do this, this language is amazing, I had fun.
> 
> At the end, I like how it turned out. It's no longer a simple, straight forward translation, but a phrase with something behind it. Some understanding, ability to brake it apart and explain why it is so and why it isn't.
> Sooo... yeah. I'd still be infinitely appreciated if anyone who speak the language help me out. At least with choosing the two sentences in the middle.
> 
> Thank you!


Bravo! I think that effort makes it fully moderator-compliant. I guess the rule is there mainly to stop the forum becoming a free translation service, and for for lazy students wanting someone else to do their homework.


----------



## Rokuruta

winenous said:


> Bravo! I think that effort makes it fully moderator-compliant. I guess the rule is there mainly to stop the forum becoming a free translation service, and for for lazy students wanting someone else to do their homework.


I perfectly understand it, Sir. And I'm sorry for behaving like one before. Thanks for your words, it really means a lot to me.


----------



## Rokuruta

Soooo... which one is better to use?

*i stjernehavet *

or

*i havet av stjerner*

When I brake it apart it doesn't show much difference. But feel like there is.


----------



## raumar

You have done a great job, and I only have a few small suggestions. 

1) I agree that you should drop the dash.

2) The final word, "rundt", does not seem quite right. The sentence looks incomplete, so the reader will ask: around what? I think you should add "deg"; "... for folk rundt deg", like ".. for people around you" in English. I suppose that you mean that she lights up the way for people around her, or close to her (and not all around the world)?

3) It could be either "natten" or "natta". "Natt" is a feminine word, which gives you the ending "-a". But you can use the masculine ending "-en" for all feminine words, so both are correct. I use "natta" myself, but what people prefer depends on (among other things) their dialect. Where in Norway does your friend come from?

4) Finally, "stjernehavet" or "havet av stjerner". Both are good translations, both work well in your context, and the meaning is the same. If I had to make the choice, I might go for "havet av stjerner", but that is just a matter of taste.


----------



## Rokuruta

raumar said:


> You have done a great job, and I only have a few small suggestions.
> 
> 1) I agree that you should drop the dash.
> 
> 2) The final word, "rundt", does not seem quite right. The sentence looks incomplete, so the reader will ask: around what? I think you should add "deg"; "... for folk rundt deg", like ".. for people around you" in English. I suppose that you mean that she lights up the way for people around her, or close to her (and not all around the world)?
> 
> 3) It could be either "natten" or "natta". "Natt" is a feminine word, which gives you the ending "-a". But you can use the masculine ending "-en" for all feminine words, so both are correct. I use "natta" myself, but what people prefer depends on (among other things) their dialect. Where in Norway does your friend come from?
> 
> 4) Finally, "stjernehavet" or "havet av stjerner". Both are good translations, both work well in your context, and the meaning is the same. If I had to make the choice, I might go for "havet av stjerner", but that is just a matter of taste.


1. The dash is out
2. For folk rundt deg, got it!
3. Originally she's from Trondheim, but now lives in Bergen. I guess I'll go with natta, if it won't bite her ear. 
4. havet av stjerner then. 

Thanks!!


----------



## raumar

Natta should be more natural in Trondheim, and Bergen prefers natten. So when she originally is from Trondheim, I think natta is the best choice - but none of them are wrong.


----------



## Rokuruta

raumar said:


> Natta should be more natural in Trondheim, and Bergen prefers natten. So when she originally is from Trondheim, I think natta is the best choice - but none of them are wrong.


Aye. You can't imagine how thankful I am. Thank you for your time 🙂


----------



## winenous

You have your answer it seems, but as you now understand some Norwegian, here are a couple of very small comments on your analysis, including the things you were wondering about.

"Nordlyset" is literally "the northern light" (singular), and it has the neuter definite article because the word ends in "lys" (light), which is neuter.

Also, Norwegian verbs are easier than you seem to think, because they never change with person. And in the present tense all forms end in "r". So "skinner" can be translated into English as "shines" (3rd person singular), "shine" (other persons, singular and plural), "is shining" or "are shining". So "er" is not really the same as the "ing" ending.

You are quite correct that "vei" is masculine, which is why is takes the "en" definite article ending.


----------



## Rokuruta

winenous said:


> You have your answer it seems, but as you now understand some Norwegian, here are a couple of very small comments on your analysis, including the things you were wondering about.
> 
> "Nordlyset" is literally "the northern light" (singular), and it has the neuter definite article because the word ends in "lys" (light), which is neuter.
> 
> Also, Norwegian verbs are easier than you seem to think, because they never change with person. And in the present tense all forms end in "r". So "skinner" can be translated into English as "shines" (3rd person singular), "shine" (other persons, singular and plural), "is shining" or "are shining". So "er" is not really the same as the "ing" ending.
> 
> You are quite correct that "vei" is masculine, which is why is takes the "en" definite article ending.


I am now really into this language... gotta be honest tho, if grammar doesn't seem to be such a huge problem, even tho there always is a challenge (at least not as much as in Icelandic or Finnish), the pronounciation is. For all nordic languages. I mean, it still takes the great of effort to sound even relatively close to how natives speak even in English (e.g. southern-american accent, northern-scottish accent) but for nordic-family languages, at least at my end, with my gringo eyes and tongue, it scares me a bit. I can't even get a simple "Vi sees" right. But still, I think, with some hours I may get some satisfying results.
Regarding your message. I'll analyze it more carfully when I get home, these comments of yourn will really help. Thank you. 
And a quick question. Do you have a favorite method you like to use to easily define gender of a word in Norwegian? For example, a word Star (noun) in polish is Gwiazda, which is feminine. In Norwegian it's Stjerne, musculine-feminine. Or "Light" - światło / lys, both are neuters respectfully. Or... the only way to know is to just remember it?


----------



## winenous

I think you're quite right - compared with most languages the grammar is simple, but some of the pronunciation can be challenging (even if it follows the spelling quite closely). The other tricky aspect for me was that there are two written languages, and many variations within them, not to mention the dialects. You would most likely want to concentrate on the bokmål language rather than nynorsk.

Regarding gender, a good rule of thumb is to start with the assumption that nouns can take masculine articles. There are only a few that really *must* be treated as feminine. Admittedly, there are a larger number that are feminine and *can* be used in the feminine form, but you needn't initially worry too much about that when speaking/writing - just don't be surprised when others do so - natten/natta is an example of that. A minority of nouns are neuter, but a lot more than those that must use feminine forms. I would say the main task as a beginner is to take special note of the neuter nouns when you come across them, and just sit down and learn the few that are strictly feminine. A better feel for the use of feminine articles will come later. I can't think of any useful rules for guessing the gender of words from their form, but words for female humans and animals will unsurprisingly be feminine.

Be aware that some people talk about a "common gender" for words that take "en" articles, but I think that just complicates the issue. Best to think in terms of masculine and feminine genders, and acknowledge that most feminine words can also take the masculine articles. Sorry if that sounds over-complicated, but it is something I initially found confusing, and wish it had been explained to me earlier.


----------



## bicontinental

raumar said:


> 4) Finally, "stjernehavet" or "havet av stjerner". Both are good translations, both work well in your context, and the meaning is the same. If I had to make the choice, I might go for "havet av stjerner", but that is just a matter of taste.



@raumar....I realize I'm not a Norwegian speaker, but these two expressions are essentially identical in Danish...to me 'stjernehavet' sounds slightly more poetic, like a wording you might come across in a hymn or older poem, wheras 'havet af (DK)/av (NO) stjerner' sounds more contemporary. Is that similar in Norwegian? (or it could just be me...)


----------



## raumar

Hi bicontinental, I see what you mean, but I did not really see this difference. I felt that both versions were poetic, maybe because it is a metaphor in any case. I don't know if this is a difference between Norwegian and Danish, or just that different people perceive these phrases differently.


----------

