# Norwegian: Jeg skal til Bergen.



## janesaddiction

- Bor du ikke her i Oslo?
- Nei. Jeg er har på ferie.
*- (1) Hvorfor skal du til Grefsen?
*
- Skal du reise til Bergen?
*- (2) Ja, jeg skal til Bergen.

*- Hvorfor reiser du til Bergen?
*- (3) Jeg skal på ferie.


*I've got a question about the meaning of "skal" in those 3 sentences above. 
The first one translates into: "Why shall you to Bergen?"
The second: "Yes, I shall to Bergen."
The third: :"I shall on holiday."  

It would make some sense if "skal" meant "shall" & "shall go" depending on the context. Is that so?


----------



## raumar

It is true that we often use "skal" in Norwegian, in sentences where the English translation would be "shall go" or another construction involving "go". Another example is the question "Hvor skal du?" (Where are you going?).

However, I would perhaps not say that "skal" actually means "shall go". I would rather say that "dra" or "reise" is implied in your Norwegian examples. If we look at your example 2, the word "reise" is optional in both the question and the answer - you can drop it if you like:

- Skal du [reise] til Bergen?
- Ja, jeg skal [reise] til Bergen.


----------



## Grefsen

Velkommen til nordiske språkforumet *janesaddiction! *


janesaddiction said:


> - Bor du ikke her i Oslo?
> - Nei. Jeg er *har* på ferie.
> *- (1) Hvorfor skal du til Grefsen?*


In this example, I think that *har* in the second sentence should instead be *her.
*


janesaddiction said:


> I've got a question about the meaning of "skal" in those 3 sentences above.
> The first one translates into: "Why shall you to *Bergen*?"


I'm sure you meant to write "Why shall you to *Grefsen*?" 



janesaddiction said:


> It would make some sense if "skal" meant "shall" & "shall go" depending on the context. Is that so?


This is something I have wondered about too.



raumar said:


> However, I would perhaps not say that "skal" actually means "shall go". I would rather say that "dra" or "reise" is implied in your Norwegian examples. If we look at your example 2, the word "reise" is optional in both the question and the answer - you can drop it if you like:


Good explanation *raumar*. 



raumar said:


> - Skal du [reise] til Bergen?
> - Ja, jeg skal [reise] til Bergen.


Would the following exchange also be correct?

- Reise du til Bergen?
- Ja, jeg skal til Bergen.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

In Norwegian, the modal auxiliary verbs are stronger than in English today, and truly represents (as the label indicates) a MODE. In other words, *skal* indicates an intent to do something, and combined with the directional preposition *til*, the main verb can easily be omitted since it does not represent any semantic difference to the sentence. Therefore, _jeg_ (subject) + _skal_ (intent) + _til_ (direction) + _Bergen_ (object) cannot be misunderstood. *Skal* does not really mean "shall" in its modern sense, but indicates the mode in which the statement is meant to be understood. Likewise, if it is not you intend, but desire to go to Bergen, you can say _jeg vil til Bergen_, since *vil* indicates the desire to do something, and the remainder is a logical consequence.

_Jeg kan norsk_ means that you are able to understand and speak Norwegian. There is no need to add "snakke". Rationale: *Kan* indicates (it does not mean, but indicates) have the ability to do something, so _jeg kan norsk_ is broken down to _ + [have the ability to] + [the Norwegian language]. "Snakke" is therefore reduntant._


----------



## raumar

Thanks for the systematic explanation, NYC! 



Grefsen said:


> Would the following exchange also be correct?
> - Reise du til Bergen?
> - Ja, jeg skal til Bergen.



The answer to Grefsen's question is yes, but you need an extra "r": 
-  Reise*r* du til Bergen?


----------



## NorwegianNYC

The way to check this in English to make it 3rd person. Reiser du til Bergen = Travel you to Bergen, however: Reiser han til Bergen = Travel*s* he to Bergen. If it takes an -s in 3rd person, it is present tense, and in Norwegian that means the verb will end in an -r.


----------



## Grefsen

raumar said:


> Thanks for the systematic explanation, NYC!


Jeg er enig. 



raumar said:


> The answer to Grefsen's question is yes, but you need an extra "r":
> -  Reise*r* du til Bergen?


Beklager!  Elementære feil.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Grefsen said:


> Jeg er enig.
> 
> Beklager!  Elementære feil.



You can say in Norwegian "det var en trykkleif".


----------



## willem81

janesaddiction said:


> - Bor du ikke her i Oslo?
> - Nei. Jeg er har på ferie.
> *- (1) Hvorfor skal du til Grefsen?
> *
> - Skal du reise til Bergen?
> *- (2) Ja, jeg skal til Bergen.
> 
> *- Hvorfor reiser du til Bergen?
> *- (3) Jeg skal på ferie.
> 
> 
> *I've got a question about the meaning of "skal" in those 3 sentences above.
> The first one translates into: "Why shall you to Bergen?"
> The second: "Yes, I shall to Bergen."
> The third: :"I shall on holiday."
> 
> It would make some sense if "skal" meant "shall" & "shall go" depending on the context. Is that so?



Shakespeare used "shall" in the same way as in Norwegian:

I have in quick determination
Thus set it down: he shall with speed to England

(Shakespeare, "Hamlet")


----------



## DaniESP

This post has helped me so much, thank you! 

I have a question, can "skal" mean "to be going to" (future)? What does "Jeg skal til Bergen" mean? _I'm going to Bergen _or_ I pretend to go to Bergen? _


----------



## Ben Jamin

DaniESP said:


> This post has helped me so much, thank you!
> 
> I have a question, can "skal" mean "to be going to" (future)? What does "Jeg skal til Bergen" mean? _I'm going to Bergen _or_ I pretend to go to Bergen? _


If you mean "intend" or "will", not "pretend", then yes.


----------



## DaniESP

Ben Jamin said:


> If you mean "intend" or "will", not "pretend", then yes.


But there are nuances, so how do you now which meaning the sencence has?


----------



## raumar

As mentioned earlier, "reise" is omitted from "Jeg skal (reise) til Bergen" - so the most literal translation may be "I am going to go to Bergen". I don't know whether there are any significant differences between this sentence and "I am going to Bergen" or "I will be going to Bergen" (but that may be because my English isn't good enough).

Anyway, if someone says "Jeg skal til Bergen", the decision has been made. He or she has decided to go there; it is more than just an intention. "I intend to go ..." is less suitable as a translation.


----------



## DaniESP

Ok, I understand, so to sum it all up, skal does have a future meaning. Thank you all!


----------



## myšlenka

DaniESP said:


> Ok, I understand, so to sum it all up, skal does have a future meaning. Thank you all!


It works as an approximation in this case, but the meaning of the verb "skulle" is not strictly future. It is a modal verb that changes its meaning depending on the context and on the syntactic surroundings. The root reading of the modal (the only possible reading in this case) goes along the lines raumar has already explained, intention or requirement. Thus, it expresses a lot more than "mere" future. The lack of precise translations cannot change that.


----------

