# Icelandic: fyrir innan



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

Komið þið sæl!
Ég fann eftirfarandi setningu í bók og ég skil hana alls ekki.
"Bærinn stóð fyrir neðan þá með lítilli tjörn við aðalgötuna og fyrir innan stórt og slétt vatnið þar sem Gunna hafði barist svo hetjulega við laxinn daginn áður."
Hér er tilraun mín til að þýða hana yfir á ensku:
"The town stood below them with a little pond by the main street and inside/within the big and smooth lake where Gunna had faught so bravely the day before."
Ég skil ekki merkingu orðanna "fyrir innan" í þessu samhengi. Hvernig gæti bærinn staðið fyrir innan vatnið? Geta orðin "fyrir innan" þýtt eitthvað annað en "inside"?
Takk kærlega fyrir!


----------



## Tjahzi

I'd go with _inside_, the omnipresent _fyrir_ is indeed quite confusing however.

Also._...fyrir innan stórt og slétt vatnið..._seems odd to me. If those are adjectives describing the water, they should be conjugated weakly, since the water is definite, huh? They look more like adverbs here...


----------



## NoMoreMrIceGuy

As a native speaker I can confirm that "fyrir innan" sounds weird in this context since as noted a town can't really stand inside/within a lake. Maybe "bakvið" or "við hliðina á" would have worked better? I sort of get the idea that the lake stands in front of or maybe besides the town :/


----------



## sindridah

This must be a big smooth lake which has been mentioned before in the story, otherwise it really doesn't make any sense


----------



## Gavril

sindridah said:


> This must be a big smooth lake which has been mentioned before in the story, otherwise it really doesn't make any sense



Would _fyrir innan_ have a different meaning if the lake had been mentioned before?


----------



## Tjahzi

No, I think it was just a reference to the lack of weak adjectival declension...


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

Tjahzi said:


> I'd go with _inside_, the omnipresent _fyrir_ is indeed quite confusing however.
> 
> Also._...fyrir innan stórt og slétt vatnið..._seems odd to me. If those are adjectives describing the water, they should be conjugated weakly, since the water is definite, huh? They look more like adverbs here...



Hello Tjahzi!
I think in this case it is OK for the adjectives "stór" and "sléttur" to be strong. The weak form of adjectives is only used to make a distinction.
For example:

*Rauða byggingin er hærri en bláa byggingin.
*_The red building is taller than the blue building._

But if no distinction if being made the adjective can be strong even though it is used with a definite noun.
For example:

*Rauða bygginguna bar við bláan himininn.*
_The red building stood out against the blue sky._

This usage is more common in poetic-like language. It's maybe like saying "The rusty car drove along the winding road" in English. This sentence might be translated like this into Icelandic: 
*Ryðgaður bíllinn keyrði eftir bugðóttum veginum (???).*

If you were to say *"Ryðgaði bíllinn keyrði eftir bugðótta veginum"* it would imply that there's a car that isn't rusty and a road that isn't winding.
I had an extremely hard time understanding this grammatical point when I first learned about it but now I'm a little more familiar with it. Hopefully these examples are correct.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham said:


> I think in this case it is OK for the adjectives "stór" and "sléttur" to be strong. The weak form of adjectives is only used to make a distinction.



Yeah this came up not so long ago in a different thread.


----------



## Tazzler

In the Romance languages which allow for flexible positioning of the adjectives the same thing seems to occur. Before the noun to indicate simple characterization, usually something inherent, and after the noun to restrict or qualify the noun.


----------



## Donnerstag

Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham said:


> Hello Tjahzi!
> I think in this case it is OK for the adjectives "stór" and "sléttur" to be strong. The weak form of adjectives is only used to make a distinction.
> For example:
> 
> *Rauða byggingin er hærri en bláa byggingin.
> *_The red building is taller than the blue building._
> 
> But if no distinction if being made the adjective can be strong even though it is used with a definite noun.
> For example:
> 
> *Rauða bygginguna bar við bláan himininn.*
> _The red building stood out against the blue sky._
> 
> This usage is more common in poetic-like language. It's maybe like saying "The rusty car drove along the winding road" in English. This sentence might be translated like this into Icelandic:
> *Ryðgaður bíllinn keyrði eftir bugðóttum veginum (???).*
> 
> If you were to say *"Ryðgaði bíllinn keyrði eftir bugðótta veginum"* it would imply that there's a car that isn't rusty and a road that isn't winding.
> I had an extremely hard time understanding this grammatical point when I first learned about it but now I'm a little more familiar with it. Hopefully these examples are correct.



They are correct, indeed. But this is a very subtle difference. "Ryðgaði bíllinn keyrði eftir bugðótta veginum" implies the existance of another road, which isn't winding and another car which isn't rusty. A follow up sentance could e.g. be "En hinn bíllinn keyrði eftir hinum veginum". It would be more unnatural to put that sentence after the "ryðgaður bíllinn ..." one.


----------

