# Norwegian: Så får vi se



## littlepond

Hei! In NRK's web series "Blank", in a message between parents and their daughter, at the end, the father says "Så får vi se". What does that mean? I think I have seen "får" earlier too with "å se" (to see): why? I thought means "to receive, to get" and also "can, may, must" sometimes (from "to receive the permission for"). But what is this new sense of "får"?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## myšlenka

Hi
That is the way to express "We'll see" in Norwegian so in this case the translation would be "Then we'll see". As far as I know, this expression is quite unique in that it's using _få_ to express a future meaning so just memorise it as such.


----------



## winenous

myšlenka said:


> Hi
> That is the way to express "We'll see" in Norwegian so in this case the translation would be "Then we'll see". As far as I know, this expression is quite unique in that it's using _få_ to express a future meaning so just memorise it as such.


Agree. If it helps, the literal English translation would be "then we get to see", which sort-of works in English, but in Norwegian it is a more natural expression.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Both English and Norwegian lack a _genuine future tense_. Instead, all kinds of future tense prosthetics ar used. English uses "will" (sometimes also "shall") and "going to", while Norwegian uses "vil", "skal", "få" and "komme til å".

Warning: "going to" and "komme til å" have different meaning.


----------



## winenous

Ben Jamin said:


> Warning: "going to" and "komme til å" have different meaning.


Is that what you meant to say? If so, what is the difference?


----------



## Ben Jamin

winenous said:


> Is that what you meant to say? If so, what is the difference?


Yes, "komme til å" has a connotation of certainty (I'm sure this will happen) which "going to" has not.


----------



## littlepond

Thanks, everyone; your answers have been very helpful to me! "å få" indeed is giving me some problems to catch hold of whenever it doesn't mean "to receive": the word seems to be used very creatively. I will need to practise a lot to be able to use it a bit. Thanks @Ben Jamin for the warning about "komme til å".


----------



## winenous

Ben Jamin said:


> Yes, "komme til å" has a connotation of certainty (I'm sure this will happen) which "going to" has not.


OK, but the difference is just in degree of certainty, and to say they have different meanings sounds a bit strong to me.

"Going to" is as neutral in terms of certainty as any other future form in English.


----------



## Ben Jamin

winenous said:


> OK, but the difference is just in degree of certainty, and to say they have different meanings sounds a bit strong to me.
> 
> "Going to" is as neutral in terms of certainty as any other future form in English.


You're certainly right.


----------



## littlepond

What is the neutral-ish variant then? To my mind (maybe I am wrong), "skal" connotes some sort of deliberation/plan and "vil" connotes some sort of desire, and as you point out, "komme til å" connotes a quite certain future in the speaker's mind. I don't know about "få": maybe that's the most neutral one?


----------



## raumar

littlepond said:


> "vil" connotes some sort of desire



Not necessarily. That is the meaning in some cases, but it can also refer to a quite certain future. 

For example, "Skolen vil bli lagt ned om to år" does not mean that the school wants to be closed down. Or "Det vil bli regn i morgen" does not mean that the rain wants to fall. 



littlepond said:


> I don't know about "få": maybe that's the most neutral one?



Well, "få" is not a standard way to describe the future. As myšlenka wrote: 



myšlenka said:


> That is the way to express "We'll see" in Norwegian so in this case the translation would be "Then we'll see". As far as I know, this expression is quite unique in that it's using _få_ to express a future meaning so just memorise it as such.


----------



## winenous

All nuances of certainty are small, but as you described, Littlepond. I think that the nuances are pretty much the same as in English, in both type and strength, and would be lost on most people. Normally I wouldn't worry about them. Skal/Shall can also imply an obligation BTW

"Få" is not a proper future tense, but it IS used in ways other than "får vi se". As I said before, just think of "få" as "get" in English, and it makes sense.


----------



## Ben Jamin

winenous said:


> All nuances of certainty are small, but as you described, Littlepond. I think that the nuances are pretty much the same as in English, in both type and strength, and would be lost on most people. Normally I wouldn't worry about them. Skal/Shall can also imply an obligation BTW
> 
> "Få" is not a proper future tense, but it IS used in ways other than "får vi se". As I said before, just think of "få" as "get" in English, and it makes sense.


"skal" expresses a strong promise (jeg skal ..) to do something or an obligation (du skal ...).
"få" emphasises a permission or the fact of getting/achieving something
"vil" is the most neutral of them.


----------



## littlepond

Thanks a lot, everyone!


----------

