# Norwegian: Det er to restauranter...



## jinmin1988

> Det er to restauranter, en kafeteria og mange barer onmbord.


I wonder why it is "Det" not "De", for i think it's a plural form — to restauranter, en kafeteria og mange barer.

Takk.


----------



## Dan2

As an English speaker, I think of "det er" as being similar to English "there is" and "there are".
"there" is neither singular nor plural; it just indicates existence, and I think "det" can be used in this same way.
And of course, "er" can be singular or plural, so it's even simpler in Norwegian than in English.

I think you could also say "De er to restauranter", with a different meaning.  "What are those two buildings?" "THEY are two restaurants".

All this is from my perspective as a language learner.  Perhaps a native speaker will have additions or corrections.


----------



## Frenchlover1

Dan2 is totally right! 

"Det er" means "there are", and could also have been replaced with "_der_ er" (easier to see what it means). The sentence describes what exist in the plane/boat/..., and not what SOME things are.

Have a lovely day


----------



## jinmin1988

Thank you, Dan and Frenchlover


----------



## cevita

> I think you could also say "De er to restauranter", with a different meaning. "What are those two buildings?" "THEY are two restaurants".



If you say "De er to restauranter" it means "they are two restaurants". And it sounds like you are referring to people. 

What you say works in English, but not Norwegian. The answer to "what are those two buildings?" would be "det er restauranter".


----------



## Dan2

cevita said:


> If you say "De er to restauranter" it means "they are two restaurants".


That's what I was trying to say: They (those buildings) are two restaurants.


cevita said:


> And it sounds like you are referring to people.


OK. Thanks for that information. I didn't realize that.
But you're not saying that "de" as "they" is _always_ restricted to people, are you?
Is it people-only only in the phrase "de er"?
How would you say, again referring to two buildings, "They are new."?  (I _thought_ it would be "De er nye.", but now I'm not sure.)

Thanks for any further help...


----------



## Frenchlover1

Hi Dan2!

No, you've been right! "De" is used for all plural objects I can think of right now. Except objects which cannot be counted, like _air_ or _snow_, but they are not exactly plural 

_De stolene, de nesene, de jentene, de følelsene, de tidene._

"De er" is also used for all plural objects (I can think of). But depending on the rest of the sentence.

E.g. you can say _de stolene er tunge, de nesene er tunge, de jentene er tunge, de følelsene er tunge, de tidene er tunge._

The word "tunge" is an adjective and describes the nouns.

"-Hva er de? -De er ..." is actually the only case I can think of where it is only right to talk about people as "de". I would have expected an answer like this in that sentence: "De er portugisere."/"De er muslimer."/"De er skuespillere."
The first thing I had thought of if the sentence was: "De er stoler.", had been that they had dressed up for carnival as chairs...

(Btw, I just have to say that you are SO good in Norwegian; I'm so impressed! What made you start learning it?)

"They (the buildings) are new." = "De er nye."! Correct

(And last: please correct any English mistakes!)

Have a wonderful day, all of you!


----------



## cevita

> But you're not saying that "de" as "they" is _always_ restricted to  people, are you?



True.
Frenchlover1 explained the use of "de" pretty well.

If someone said 
"hva er de to bygningene der", the answer would be 
"det er to restauranter". Saying "de er to restauranter" sounds awckward, but I can't explain why.

I'm sorry I can't be any more help. I certaintly didn't mean to confuse you.

The answer to "Hva er det/de/det der" is (almost always) "det er xx".
Hva er de (pointing at curtains)
det (that which is over there) er gardiner

Hva er det der (pointing at bottles)
det (that which is over there) er flasker


----------



## Dan2

Both Frenchlover1's and Cevita's notes are very helpful.
(In some of Frenchlover's examples, "de" means "the", not "they", a separate issue.)

Putting together the two posts, it sounds like the situation is this: Corresponding to English "They are NOUN"...
For people, use "De er..."
For things, use "Det er..."
But "de" is OK for things in "Hva er de?" (cevita gives some examples)
and for "They are ADJECTIVE": They (the buildings) are new: De er nye

(Plural "det er" is reminiscent of French/German "ce sont"/"es sind".  But in English, no one, from the college professor to the most uneducated, would say "it are" or "this are".)

When we move away from "være" ("er") does one use "de" for things?
- Where did you get those books? - _They _come from the library.
- Why does the computer have two CPU's?- _They _help it run faster.

Thanks for your (plural) help.
(And on a more general note, thanks for the word "they" itself, which we English speakers took from Norse to replace our Old English word...)


----------



## Tjahzi

As a Swedish speaker, I find this discussion very interesting. In Swedish, the same(/corresponding) sentence, "Det är två restauranger", would not sound natural. When you want to express "general existence" (that is, rephrasing the sentence to a subject less clause), one would rather use another verb such as "finnas" eller "ligga". For example: "Det ligger ett kafé på torget" or "Det finns två restauranger på gatan". 
Constructions such as "De är två restauranger" can only occur as a response to a question such as "Vad är de där byggnaderna?" (_"What are those buildings?"_). However, the issue is further complicated by the fact that "det" is usually pronounced [deː] and "de" [dɔmː] and as such you are likely to find both forms in writing.

My question is, does Norwegian use any constructions corresponding to the ones with "finnas" och "ligga"?


@Dan2: In Swedish, and in Norwegian as well, I believe, the distinction between 3rd person singular animate and inanimate for pronouns is quite a new invention (do note that nynorsk doesn't have it). Having one single, instead of one for each gender, 3rd person plural pronoun is an older habit ("de" seem to stem from old 3rd person plural masculine form). 

So, I very much believe that the answer to your example question is that "de" should indeed be used simply because it refers to plural objects (and not to "general it"). At least that would be the case in Swedish; "De kommer från biblioteket" and "De gör datorn snabbare".


----------



## Cerb

jinmin1988 said:


> Det er to restauranter, en kafeteria og mange barer onmbord.


I'd prefer a construction with "finnes" here in Norwegian. The sentence as is translates to "*it is* two restaurants (...) on board" in my ears. I'd use "det finnes" if I was to translate "there are".


----------



## Dan2

Cerb said:


> I'd prefer a construction with "finnes" here in Norwegian. The sentence as is translates to "*it is* two restaurants (...) on board" in my ears. I'd use "det finnes" if I was to translate "there are".


I don't doubt that "Det finnes" is correct here, but isn't "Det er" _also_ used to mean "There are (plural)..."? For ex., "Det er mange..." is commonly heard, isn't it?
So are there some situations in which one should use "det finnes" for "there are" and others where "det er" is fine?

Also, I wonder where Jinmin got the original "Det er to restauranter" sentence.

Thanks in advance for any further help.


----------



## Cerb

You're right and both are fine gramatically. Even the example sentence is fine, I just prefer using "finnes" here. "Det er" doesn't actually translate to "it is" here, it's just the feeling I get from that sentence.

"Det er/det finnes" would translate to "es sind/es gibt" in German if that's to any help by the way


----------



## jinmin1988

> Also, I wonder where Jinmin got the original "Det er to restauranter" sentence.


It's from a teach yourself book named Norwegian by Margaretha Danbolt Simons.


----------

