# Norwegian: dissecting human bodies



## Grefsen

I just took an anatomy course that was the prerequisite for a  more advanced course that involves the dissection of human bodies.  However, I'd like to explain to someone på norsk that it is possible to learn about human anatomy without actually dissecting human bodies.  

Here is my attempt:

Det er mulig å lære mye om menneskelig anatomi, uten faktisk å dissekere menneskelige  organer.


----------



## oskhen

Grefsen said:


> I just took an anatomy course that was the prerequisite for a  more advanced course that involves the dissection of human bodies.  However, I'd like to explain to someone på norsk that it is possible to learn about human anatomy without actually dissecting human bodies.
> 
> Here is my attempt:
> 
> Det er mulig å lære mye om menneskelig anatomi, uten faktisk å dissekere menneskelige  organer.



I suppose it would be "dissekere mennesker". Now you've written "dissect human organs" - but it's the human one is dissecting, isn't it? Though simply "dissekere" should work just fine, I suppose. I would also write "å faktisk" rather than "faktisk å". I think it looks more correct, but that might be just a matter of taste.


----------



## Grefsen

oskhen said:


> I suppose it would be "dissekere mennesker". Now you've written "dissect human organs" - but it's the human one is dissecting, isn't it?


I'm not sure I understand your question.  



oskhen said:


> Though simply "dissekere" should work just fine, I suppose.


Perhaps it would be better to just use "dissekere" in my example since the main point I wanted to make was that it is possible to learn a lot about anatomy without doing any dissecting. 



oskhen said:


> I would also write "å faktisk" rather than "faktisk å". I think it looks more correct, but that might be just a matter of taste.


Takk for det!  

Here's a revision using "gjøre noe disseksjon" for "doing some dissection."

Det er mulig å lære mye om menneskelig anatomi, uten å faktisk gjøre noe disseksjon.


----------



## Grefsen

oskhen said:


> I suppose it would be "dissekere mennesker".


I did a Google search on "dissekere mennesker" and got 100 results with most that I saw coming from Danish websites.  Interestingly enough, the first result was this post.



oskhen said:


> Though simply "dissekere" should work just fine, I suppose.


When I do a search on "dissekere" there are over 28,000 results and on the first two pages many more most of the results are from Norwegian sites.  Here is one definition of "dissekere" I found:

*dissekere*



> *dissekere,* utføre _disseksjon_,  blottlegging og isolering av de enkelte organer, muskler, årer, nerver  osv. for å kunne studere deres form, forløp, innbyrdes leie og funksjon.


*dissect*, process of dissection, disclosure and isolation  of the individual organs, muscles, veins, nerves, etc. in order to study their shape, course, mutual use of space and function.


----------



## oskhen

Grefsen said:


> Here's a revision using "gjøre noe disseksjon" for "doing some dissection."
> 
> Det er mulig å lære mye om menneskelig anatomi, uten å faktisk gjøre noe disseksjon.



"gjøre disseksjon" is not correct. It would be "utføre disseksjon". If you want to include "noe", it must be plural in this context: "utføre noen disseksjoner".


----------



## Grefsen

oskhen said:


> "gjøre disseksjon" is not correct. It would be "utføre disseksjon". If you want to include "noe", it must be plural in this context: "utføre noen disseksjoner".


For what it's worth, here is what I discovered after doing some more Google searches:

"gjøre disseksjon"  2 results

"utføre disseksjon"  5 results

"utføre disseksjoner" 3 results

"utføre noen disseksjoner" no results


----------



## Grefsen

oskhen said:


> I suppose it would be "dissekere mennesker".


Would it perhaps be better to use "lik," the Norwegian word for "corpse," instead of "mennesker?"

I was doing a search on "dissekere lik" and found this link to some information about the 16th century anatomist and  physician Andreas Vesalius that contained the following sentence: 

Han gjeninnførte praksisen med å dissekere lik egenhendig.

My attempt at a translation:

He resumed the practice of dissecting the corpse on his own.


----------



## Ben Jamin

oskhen said:


> I would also write "å faktisk" rather than "faktisk å". I think it looks more correct, but that might be just a matter of taste.


 All my masters that taught me Norwegian always repeated: "do not ever put anything between 'å' and the rest of the infinitive.


----------



## Magb

Ben Jamin said:


> All my masters that taught me Norwegian always repeated: "do not ever put anything between 'å' and the rest of the infinitive.



Ah yes, the split infinitive. Just as is the case in English, "split infinitives" are completely grammatical in Norwegian, no matter how much people whine about them. I agree with oshken that "å faktisk" sounds better than "faktisk å" in this case, but it's really just a question of personal taste.

(I know you were merely relaying what your teachers told you, Ben, so please don't take this as an attack on you.)


----------



## oskhen

Grefsen said:


> Han gjeninnførte praksisen med å dissekere lik egenhendig.
> 
> My attempt at a translation:
> 
> He resumed the practice of dissecting the corpse on his own.



"Dissekere lik" is just fine, but not necessary in the sentence you first asked about.

In the sentence you're translating into English now, it'd be "dissecting corpses" - it's plural. 

Also, it's "reintroduce" rather than "resume".


----------

