# Norwegian: I'm full



## jm88

Hei!
Jeg vet at "Jeg er full" betyr "I am drunk" på norsk, men hvordan kan man utrykke "I'm full(because I have eaten a lot)"?


----------



## myšlenka

Hei,
du kan si "Jeg er mett". Hvis du er veldig mett, kan du si "Jeg er stappmett" 
En litt mer formell variant er "Jeg er forsynt".


----------



## jm88

Tusen takk, Myslenka!


----------



## Grefsen

jm88 said:


> Hei!
> Jeg vet at "Jeg er full" betyr "I am drunk" på norsk, men hvordan kan man utrykke "I'm full(because I have eaten a lot)"?


I unfortunately didn't learn the expression *"jeg er mett"* until after I had embarrassed myself in front of a group of Norwegians by saying *"Jeg er full."*  (It was my first day in Norway and I had only consumed one beer, but had eaten a lot of food.) 





myšlenka said:


> Hei,
> du kan si "Jeg er mett". Hvis du er veldig mett, kan du si "Jeg er stappmett"
> En litt mer formell variant er "Jeg er forsynt".


Tusen takk for det *myšlenka!   *I'm guessing that saying  *"Jeg er stappmett"* would be appropriate if one is so full (or stuffed as we often say in English) that there is no room left for dessert.

I'm also curious to know when it would be more appropriate to use *"Jeg er forsynt"* instead of *"Jeg er mett"*?


----------



## myšlenka

Hi Grefsen,
as mentioned earlier you would use *"jeg er forsynt"* in more formal situations. You're basically saying that you've had your share (or similar) so the phrase is abstracting away from the bodily functions related to eating. It's more a question about the way you want to be perceived rather than a question of what's appropriate but generally, I think I would use *"jeg er forsynt"* with people I don't know and *"jeg er mett"* with people I know.


----------



## Grefsen

Tusen takk for en god forklaring *myšlenka.  *


myšlenka said:


> You're basically saying that you've had your share (or similar) so the phrase is abstracting away from the bodily functions related to eating. It's more a question about the way you want to be perceived rather than a question of what's appropriate but generally, I think I would use *"jeg er forsynt"* with people I don't know and *"jeg er mett"* with people I know.


Now I have a much better understanding of when it would be more appropiate to use *"jeg er forsynt" *instead of *"jeg er mett."  *


----------



## basslop

Suggestion to I'm full (colloquial): "Det er fullt" - and maybe underline it by pointing at your stomach.


----------



## Grefsen

Tusen takk for det* basslop! * 


basslop said:


> Suggestion to I'm full (colloquial): "Det er fullt" - and maybe underline it by pointing at your stomach.


So if I say "It is full" to a Norwegian and point to my stomach then it means my stomach is full of food, but if I just say "I am full" then it means "I am drunk."  

Does anyone know how this expression "Jeg er full" evolved so that it came to mean "I am drunk"?


----------



## perevoditel

I don't know exactly how this proceeded, but Swedish Ethymological Dictionary says this comes from an expression "fulder ok drukkin" - "full and drunk" (source), it was also used about meals ("I'm too full", "I'm not going to eat more").


----------



## Sebastián Berko

Dansk:
Jeg er mæt
Jeg er forspist / jeg har forspist mig

Well, the spelling is different, but I'm pretty sure this'll work for you in Norwegian too.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Grefsen said:


> Tusen takk for det* basslop! *  So if I say "It is full" to a Norwegian and point to my stomach then it means my stomach is full of food, but if I just say "I am full" then it means "I am drunk."
> 
> Does anyone know how this expression "Jeg er full" evolved so that it came to mean "I am drunk"?



For the exact same reason "I am full" came to mean "jeg er mett" in English. There is no difference in being full of food or full of drink. The expression did not evolve from one language to another - it is an example of divergent sematic drift in Norwegian and English


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

NorwegianNYC said:


> For the exact same reason "I am full" came to mean "jeg er mett" in English. There is no difference in being full of food or full of drink. The expression did not evolve from one language to another - it is an example of divergent sematic drift in Norwegian and English



The English expression is more logical than the Norwegian one. In English, "full" simply implies that the stomach is "full" of food, (regardless whether its contents be ice cream, lingon berry jam or spicy chicken curry). However, in Norwegian, the stomach isn't necessarily "full" of drink (some get drunk with little liquor), rather that the person is in an inebriated state resulting from alcohol consumption (you wouldn't say "han er full" if he had only been drinking apple juice, would you?).

As for the origin, I think it lies in Norse paganism. There was an ancient drinking tradition mentioned in the Sagas and elsewhere of drinking the "full" of a pagan god, for example, "to drink Odin's/Thor's "full"" or "að drekka full Óðins/Þórs" in Icelandic (in Icelandic, by the way, you also say "hann er fullur" (lit. he is "full") to mean "he's drunk"). The word "full" in this ancient context was referring to the drinking horn or goblet used in the pagan drinking session or "sumbl". I don't know exactly what these libation rituals entailed but undoubtedly when there's Norse mythology and Vikings in the mix "mead" is bound to be the drink of choice! Maybe the ensuing intoxication led to the present usage of "full" in Scandinavian languages.

According to Ásgeir Blöndal Magnússon's etymological dictionary of Icelandic, the noun "full" (referring to the pagan ritual, the drinking goblet/horn and, in more modern Icelandic, a "toast" (as in "skål!"/"skál!")) is of controversial origin. Blöndal says that perhaps a "full" (i.e. "not empty") tub of drink (of whatever kind) is behind its origin while others claim that the meaning of "drinking container" is more original and that the word is related to the Latin "pelvis" (bowl), Greek pélla, and possibly the ancient Indian word "pārī" (meaning a "pail of milk"). Blöndal concludes his entry with the one-word-sentence: Vafasamt. - Dubious.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Hi BiU


Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham said:


> The English expression is more logical than the Norwegian one. In English, "full" simply implies that the stomach is "full" of food, (regardless whether its contents be ice cream, lingon berry jam or spicy chicken curry). However, in Norwegian, the stomach isn't necessarily "full" of drink (some get drunk with little liquor), rather that the person is in an inebriated state resulting from alcohol consumption (you wouldn't say "han er full" if he had only been drinking apple juice, would you?).



I wasn't going to get into all that, but: yes and no. The English expression is not more logical. You are not literally 'full of food' when you have eaten a lot, more than a person is 'full of love' or 'full of shit' when they seem to possess a sufficient quantity of the quality in question. 'To drink ones fill' is an expression in the English language as well. It is even found in the Bible (Song of Solomon 5:1): _I have drunk my wine and my milk. Eat, O friends, and drink; drink your fill, O lovers_. However, 'to drink ones fill' is different than 'eat ones fill' in the sense it refers to alcoholic beverages, not beverages in general.
The connection between _drikke seg full_ and 'eat oneself full' is not an indication of how much alcoholic beverage or food your body physically contains, but how saturated you are with the respective substances.



> As for the origin, I think it lies in Norse paganism. There was an ancient drinking tradition mentioned in the Sagas and elsewhere of drinking the "full" of a pagan god, for example, "to drink Odin's/Thor's "full"" or "að drekka full Óðins/Þórs" in Icelandic (in Icelandic, by the way, you also say "hann er fullur" (lit. he is "full") to mean "he's drunk"). The word "full" in this ancient context was referring to the drinking horn or goblet used in the pagan drinking session or "sumbl". I don't know exactly what these libation rituals entailed but undoubtedly when there's Norse mythology and Vikings in the mix "mead" is bound to be the drink of choice! Maybe the ensuing intoxication led to present usage of "full" in Scandinavian languages.


If not necessarily the origin, it must have influenced the usage. There is a difference between 'drinking a full' and being "full", because the former denotes the drinking of a full bowl of ale (hence "skål") in honor of something, whereas the latter is a description of yourself once you have had a sufficient (or beyond...) amount to drink. Perhaps the expressions have conflated. We are no longer drinking "fulls" to the gods, but we still get filled up on alcohol. I take the fact that all Scandinavian languages have this expression [Ice: "hann er fullur"/Swe: "han ä full"/Da: "han er fuld/No: "han er full"] as an indication of a meaning beyond the drinking of a bowl to the gods, but it is probably related.



> According to Ásgeir Blöndal Magnússon's etymological dictionary of Icelandic, "full" (referring to the pagan ritual, the drinking goblet/horn and, in more modern Icelandic, a "toast" (as in "skål!"/"skál!") is of controversial origin. Blöndal says that perhaps a "full" (i.e. "not empty") tub of drink (of whatever kind) is behind its origin while others claim that the meaning of "drinking container" is more original and that the word is related to the Latin "pelvis" (bowl), Greek pélla, and possibly the ancient Indian word "pārī" (meaning a "pail of milk"). Blöndal concludes his entry with the one-word-sentence: Vafasamt. - Dubious.



Another etymology of "full" is: Pr.Germ _*fullaz_ and PIE _*pel_ (Grimm's law) = "full, filled up", which again is related to Latin: _plenum_


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

NorwegianNYC said:


> However, 'to drink ones fill' is different than 'eat ones fill' in the sense it refers to alcoholic beverages, not beverages in general.
> The connection between _drikke seg full_ and 'eat oneself full' is not an indication of how much alcoholic beverage or food your body physically contains, but how saturated you are with the respective substances.



I'm not going to get into an argument with you over which usage is more logical but I will correct you and point out that in the Modern English I speak "to drink one's fill" does not specifically imply alcohol and by extension doesn't necessarily allude to drunkenness. Just as "to eat one's fill" can apply to any food, so too can "to drink one's fill" apply to any beverage (for example, "the toddlers drank their fill of apple juice"). According to the dictionary on macmillandictionary.com to "eat/drink your fill" means "to keep eating or drinking until you are not hungry or thirsty any more". The English-English dictionary on wordreference.com defines "one's fill" as "the quantity needed to satisfy one". It has nothing to do with alcohol necessarily, you see. I don't know if the same was true of the English of King James, however.



NorwegianNYC said:


> Another etymology of "full" is: Pr.Germ _*fullaz_ and PIE _*pel_ (Grimm's law) = "full, filled up", which again is related to Latin: _plenum_



I didn't mean to suggest that the "drunk" meaning of "full" in Scandinavian languages has nothing to do with "full" vs. "empty" (and its etymology), I just thought that it would be interesting to add some historical context to the word and give a possible source of its meaning (which is what "Grefsen" originally asked for). To simply pass the origin of the expression "han er full" to semantic drift is to leave out the interesting Norse pagan ritual of "sumbl" where the word "full" plays a noteworthy and perhaps slightly peculiar role.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Hi BiU


Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham said:


> ...in the Modern English I speak "to drink one's fill" does not specifically imply alcohol and by extension doesn't necessarily allude to drunkenness. Just as "to eat one's fill" can apply to any food, so too can "to drink one's fill" apply to any beverage (for example, "the toddlers drank their fill of apple juice"). According to the dictionary on macmillandictionary.com to "eat/drink your fill" means "to keep eating or drinking until you are not hungry or thirsty any more". The English-English dictionary on wordreference.com defines "one's fill" as "the quantity needed to satisfy one". It has nothing to do with alcohol necessarily, you see. I don't know if the same was true of the English of King James, however.


I do not know either. I included it as an example of full/fill being used in relation to beverage (and alcoholic beverage in particular) as well as food. This was discussed further up.



> I didn't mean to suggest that the "drunk" meaning of "full" in Scandinavian languages has nothing to do with "full" vs. "empty" (and its etymology), I just thought that it would be interesting to add some historical context to the word and give a possible source of its meaning (which is what "Grefsen" originally asked for). To simply pass the origin of the expression "han er full" to semantic drift is to leave out the interesting Norse pagan ritual of "sumbl" where the word "full" plays a noteworthy and perhaps slightly peculiar role.


I do not think full/fill has ever been used to mean 'drunk' in English, but I think the Scandinavian usage of {full/fuld/fullur} and English 'full' is from the same origin, but have drifted semantically so that now they represent two different states of fullness. However - I do find your reference interesting: If "one's fill" is "the quantity needed to satisfy one". That sentiment probably goes a long way to explain the use of 'full' for 'drunk' in Scandinavian. What is needed to satisfy someone in terms of alcohol is usually a state of inebriation. This is also an interesting cultural reference. We only have to look at the sagas (and you mentioned sumbl/symbel) to see that the drinking in excess was a cultural norm. By that logic - 'full' is really when you cannot drink anymore (one is physically full of ale or about to pass out).


----------



## bicontinental

Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham said:


> I'm not going to get into an  argument with you over which usage is more logical but I will correct  you and point out that in the Modern English I speak "to drink one's  fill" does not specifically imply alcohol and by extension doesn't  necessarily allude to drunkenness. Just as "to eat one's fill" can apply  to any food, so too can "to drink one's fill" apply to any beverage  (for example, "the toddlers drank their fill of apple juice"). According  to the dictionary on macmillandictionary.com to "eat/drink your fill"  means "to keep eating or drinking until you are not hungry or thirsty any more".  The English-English dictionary on wordreference.com defines "one's  fill" as "the quantity needed to satisfy one". It has nothing to do with  alcohol necessarily, you see. I don't know if the same was true of the  English of King James, however.



 I agree that ‘to drink one’s fill’ just means ‘to quench one’s thirst’. In older forms of English incl. the Bible in the KJV there are also references to individuals ‘drinking their fill’ of well water, milk etc. I actually find that the Bible is frequently quite specific when referring to excessive consumption of alcohol (i.e. to be _drunk_ with wine, _drunkenness_ as opposed to being sober…). I‘ve not heard that the above expression pertains to alcoholic beverages only. 

  Bic.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Hi Bic

Since I am responsible for this digression, I feel I should weigh in. I am not saying that "drink one's fill" is equivalent to "drikke seg full". My point is that the word "full/fill" in English is also used about beverage, and that the two concepts of fullness drifted semantically in Scandinavian and English, and now denote two very different experiences. "Drunk" is of course the English equivalent of "full", and "full" is that of "mett".

I do not disagree with the cultural connection BiU refers to; I am simply trying to tie up the sensation of being full (and the word to describe it) in two different languages, to two different media (food and drink)


----------



## bicontinental

Hi NYC,


  My post was merely in response to BiU’s comment about the usage and implications of the term ‘_drink one’s fill_’ especially in older English texts. I believe his/her comment may have been prompted by this sentence: 




NorwegianNYC said:


> However, 'to drink ones fill' is different than 'eat ones fill' in the sense it refers to alcoholic beverages, not beverages in general.



But thanks for the clarification.

  Best, Bic.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Well - it was a carelessly phrased sentence. It was in reference to 'Song of Solomon' in the Bible, where they eat and "drink their fill" (of wine). The nature of "the fill" may be any liquid fit for human consumption...


----------



## StunningNorway

Hei alle


In reply to a previous post, ("_I do not think full/fill has ever been used to mean 'drunk' in English...." )
_
In "Australian English" (slang) we use _lots_ of expressions for somebody who is drunk. *"He's/ She's/* *They're full!"* is a _common_ one. It is one that I _definitely_ use. There's a saying too.... "As full as a goog!" (meaning: drunk!)


----------

