# Norwegian: "Skal til" vs "Skal på"



## BrMo

Hey all,

I'm a bit confused as to when Norwegian uses "skal på" and when it uses "skal til"

"Skal til" is used when there is talk about cities or countries, i.e. classic destinations/geographical locations or directions.

For exampel: Jeg skal til Tyskland = I am going to Germany.

"Skal på" seems to be used when going to an activity, including jobs.

For exampel: Jeg skal på karneval = I am going to the carnival (where this carnival is hdld, isn't specified).

However there seems to be a grey zone between those two. For instance, I am going to the cinema is translated with "Jeg skal på kino", but seeing there aren't that many cinemas around, the location of where you're going seems to be already (implicitely) specified. So why not use "til" then?

Or am I just making it more difficult than it really is?

Could I use "skal til" + city or country and "skal på" + activity as my main rule?

Tusen takk!

Bruno


----------



## willem81

I suspect that the different prepositions here change the meaning of the sentence. For example:

Jeg skal _til_ arbetet. - means that I am moving _towards_ the workplace.
Jeg skal _på_ arbetet. - means that I intend to be _at_ work.


----------



## sdr083

I think *til + city or country* and *på + activity* is generally a good rule. Can't really come up with any obvious exceptions, but they may of course still exist.



willem81 said:


> Jeg skal _til_ arbetet. - means that I am moving _towards_ the workplace.



I would never say "Jeg skal til arbeid(et)". It would be "Jeg skal på arbeid" (indefinite) or, if I am on my way, "Jeg er på vei". In the latter case I suppose you could use "til" (would like to know other Norwegians' opinions on this). Personally I'd probably say "Er på vei på jobb" ...


----------



## willem81

Thank you for the correction. Obviously the seeming parallels with Swedish I have tried to draw here are not valid in this particular case.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

*Til* is directional, whereas _*på*_ indicates a location


----------



## willem81

NorwegianNYC said:


> *Til* is directional, whereas _*på*_ indicates a location



Then a construction like _'Jeg skal til arbeid'_ seems to be correct, doesn't it?


----------



## myšlenka

willem81 said:


> Then a construction like _'Jeg skal til arbeid'_ seems to be correct, doesn't it?


Try googling that phrase and you'll find the answer.


----------



## willem81

I have tried. Such a phrase fails to exist in Norwegian, as it seems. So, we must use either _Jeg skal på arbeid_ or _Jeg går til arbeid_.


----------



## myšlenka

willem81 said:


> I have tried. Such a phrase fails to exist in Norwegian, as it seems. So, we must use either _Jeg skal på arbeid_ or _Jeg går til arbeid_.


And also _jeg går på arbeid _
Note that none of these have the same meaning.


----------



## Ben Jamin

sdr083 said:


> I think *til + city or country* and *på + activity* is generally a good rule. Can't really come up with any obvious exceptions, but they may of course still exist.
> 
> 
> 
> I would never say "Jeg skal til arbeid(et)". It would be "Jeg skal på arbeid" (indefinite) or, if I am on my way, "Jeg er på vei". In the latter case I suppose you could use "til" (would like to know other Norwegians' opinions on this). Personally I'd probably say "Er på vei på jobb" ...


But if you are a boss and you see some employees having a prolonged break, you would say "Gå tilbake til arbeidet!", not "på arbeidet".


----------



## raumar

It is of course correct that *til* is directional, whereas _*på*_ indicates a location. But this distinction may be a bit confusing in this context, as both _*skal til*_ and _*skal på*_ mean that you are going somewhere. I think the main rule that BrMo suggested is useful: _*skal til*_ is about location and _*skal på*_ is about activity. When we say "Jeg skal på kino", we focus on the activity -- to see a movie. If you say "Jeg skal til kinoen", you indicate that the location is more important than seeing a movie. For example, if you are a plumber who is going to repair something at the cinema. 

The choice between the definite and indefinite form is another question. If we take one of BrMo's examples, "Jeg skal på karneval" is less specific than "Jeg skal på karnevalet" ("a carnival" rather than "the carnival"). But some of these expressions are set phrases. We say "Jeg skal på kino" also when we are talking about a specific cinema, not "på kinoen". With "til", it is usually the definite form ("til skolen", not "til skole").

A final complication: In some cases, we use *i* instead of* på*. For example: "Jeg skal i kirken/i operaen", not "på". Or "Jeg skal i selskap", but "Jeg skal på fest". Don't ask me why - prepositions are not logical.


----------



## BrMo

Takk for forklaringen


----------



## NorwegianNYC

raumar - you are saying the exact same thing as I am! But, *til* og *skal til *indicate that you are moving towards something, i.e. directional. And, *på *og *skal på *means you are going to or ending up at a certain location. Example: "Jeg skal til kontoret" is short for "jeg skal forflytte meg til dit hvor kontoret er", mens "jeg skal på kontoret" betyr "jeg skal til det stedet hvor kontoret er". There are similar, but not the same. It is a subtle difference here. The preposition *til* is always used about direction in Norwegian - either physical, temporal or possessive. On the other hand, the preposition *på* is used about a physical or temporal location.

Also, it is perfectly fine to say "jeg skal en tur på kirka" or "jeg skal på operaen i kveld. The use of *i* or *på* in these cases are optional. If anything, "i operaen" is referring to the actual concert hall, whereas "på operaen" means the builing, which may or may not include a visit to the concert hall.


----------



## myšlenka

NorwegianNYC said:


> Also, it is perfectly fine to say "jeg skal en tur på kirka"


_Skal/skulle på kirka _sounds really bad in my ears. A simple google search shows that I am not the only one.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

myslenka - if you are referring to _kirka_ as a location it is different. For those of us who live abroad, Sjømannskirka is the place to meet other Norwegians, and then you go "på kirka". If you are attending a service, you are "i kirka".


----------



## Cerb

I have to say I agree with Raumar for some uses of "på" here. At the very least there seems to be certain fixed expressions where "på" is used about an activity. "På" is used for physical and temporal location as well of course, but mainly in cases where there is a spesific place mentioned (i.e. definite form is used). It makes more sense to describe the following examples as having to do with an activity to me.

Jeg skal på:
Kino
konsert
jobb
fisketur 
jakt
etc.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Cerb - as much as I agree with both you and raumer, I feel you are missing an important nuance. The propositions *til* and *på* have similar, but not identical properties, in this case. The use of *til* describes the process (i.e. direction, movement) as well as the destination, whereas *på* identifies and put emphasis on the destination itself.

"Hvor skal du?" "Jeg skal (dvs. er på vei) til en konsert i operaen"
"Hvor skal du?" "Jeg skal på konsert med noen venner"

The emphasis shifts from the goal to the process with the use of *til*: "Jeg skal til jobben" = I am _on my way_ to work. Conversely, "jeg skal på jobb" = I have _to be_ at work.


----------



## frugihoyi

A question about the use of *i* vs *på*:
I know that in Danish you can go *i skole*or *på skole*. I think one refers to university and the other grade school or something like that, but I'm not sure which is which. Is it the same in Norwegian?


----------



## NorwegianNYC

_Han er i skolen_ usually means "he is working in the school system". _Han er på skolen_ means "he is at school". The idiomatic expression "å ta i skole" means to train or instruct someone.


----------



## raumar

NorwegianNYC said:


> Cerb - as much as I agree with both you and raumer, I feel you are missing an important nuance. The propositions *til* and *på* have similar, but not identical properties, in this case. The use of *til* describes the process (i.e. direction, movement) as well as the destination, whereas *på* identifies and put emphasis on the destination itself.
> 
> "Hvor skal du?" "Jeg skal (dvs. er på vei) til en konsert i operaen"
> "Hvor skal du?" "Jeg skal på konsert med noen venner"
> 
> The emphasis shifts from the goal to the process with the use of *til*: "Jeg skal til jobben" = I am _on my way_ to work. Conversely, "jeg skal på jobb" = I have _to be_ at work.



Thanks for this explanation, NYC. I agree. And I think we can unite the different explanations: whereas *til *describes the process/direction,* på* gives room for other aspects of the destination -- such as the activity that goes on there.   

You are right about "på sjømannskirka", I had not thought about that. But I would not use "på kirka" about a church in Norway. I suppose this just shows how difficult prepositions may be.


----------

