# Norwegian: subordinate clause rule



## sjiraff

Hello, this is my first post here (I had no idea this forum even existed) but I thought I'd ask if anyone can explain this:

Usually in Norwegian adjectives or words such as "ikke" or "aldri" go after the verb (Jeg kan ikke noe for det! - i can't help it! Jeg blir aldri trøtt - i'm never tired!)

But it seems often this can swap, and my issue is I don't exactly see the clear pattern for this. I recognise it in some cases, such as: Når det ikke er... (Rather than, er ikke) but take these examples:

This is an error message I got on a Norwegian website:
"Vi er kjempelei oss, men vi kan ikke finne siden du leter etter"

However (if I'm right) let's say it was "fordi" instead of "men" then it would be:
"Vi er kjempelei oss, fordi vi ikke kan finne siden du leter etter"

I was just wondering if someone could explain what the actual rule for swapping these is,  it seems to happen mostly mid-sentence after something has been said (Han sa at du ikke skal gjøre det!)

I'm not sure I even know what "subordinate clause" means to be perfectly honest!

Sorry if my post is a bit convoluted, cheers for any help!


----------



## myšlenka

Hi,
first of all you need to understand the difference between a main clause and a subordinate clause. A main clause is a clause is that can stand alone as a sentence while a subordinate clause cannot. In the first one of your examples we have two main clauses:

1) [Vi er kjempelei oss], men [vi kan ikke finne siden du leter etter].

Each of these main clauses can stand alone as sentences: _"Vi er kjempelei oss"_ and "_vi kan ikke finne siden du leter etter"_ (the function of _men_ is to conjoin them). In your second example, the second part is not a main clause but a subordinate clause because it cannot stand alone as a sentence:

2) [Vi er kjempelei oss [fordi vi ikke kan finne siden du leter etter]].

The structure is different in that the subordinate clause is part of the main clause. _"Vi er kjempelei oss"_ makes sense on its own but "_fordi vi ikke kan finne siden du leter etter"_ makes sense only as part of a main clause.

So, in matrix clauses in Norwegian, the inflected verb precedes sentential adverbs like _ikke, aldri, sjelden, ofte, alltid _etc while in subordinate clauses it follows. These are some common subjunctions (words that introduce subordinate clauses and "trigger" this switch) in Norwegian: _fordi, som, om, hvis, siden, når, da, at, dersom..._
The list is not exhaustive.

PS! You will see deviations from this rule in contexts with the subjunction _at_, but just ignore that. Make the switch and you're on the safe side


----------



## sjiraff

Ahh, I understand what you mean with that now. You wouldn't just say "Fordi vi ikke kan finne siden." without it being about something else/connected. 

So does it still swap twice in a row? I mean ehm, let's say as part of a sentence you were saying "Jeg mistet telefonen min på bakken slik at skjermen ikke fungerer og jeg ikke kan ringe vennene mine / or -og jeg kan ikke ringe vennene mine". 
(See how after 'slik at' it became 'ikke fungerer', but then I added a second part after 'og' as another consequence of the phone falling on the ground, so I don't know if I keep swapping the word order)

Thanks for explaining what it is though, I had so much trouble trying to work it out and to be honest this is the biggest thing that makes me too scared to write/say things in Norwegian because I'm scared I put ikke/aldri/ofte etc in the wrong order in these cases!


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> So does it still swap twice in a row? I mean ehm, let's say as part of a sentence you were saying "Jeg mistet telefonen min på bakken slik at skjermen ikke fungerer og jeg ikke kan ringe vennene mine / or -og jeg kan ikke ringe vennene mine".
> (See how after 'slik at' it became 'ikke fungerer', but then I added a second part after 'og' as another consequence of the phone falling on the ground, so I don't know if I keep swapping the word order)
> 
> Thanks for explaining what it is though, I had so much trouble trying to work it out and to be honest this is the biggest thing that makes me too scared to write/say things in Norwegian because I'm scared I put ikke/aldri/ofte etc in the wrong order in these cases!


Yes, it swaps twice in a row but in this particular context, not being able to call your friends is a consequence of the screen not working and not of the phone falling on the ground. So I would rephrase it too "_Jeg mistet telefonen min på bakken slik at skjermen ikke fungerer så jeg kan ikke ringe vennene mine"._


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> Yes, it swaps twice in a row but in this particular context, not being able to call your friends is a consequence of the screen not working and not of the phone falling on the ground. So I would rephrase it too "_Jeg mistet telefonen min på bakken slik at skjermen ikke fungerer så jeg kan ikke ringe vennene mine"._



Ahh yes, I guess I didn't think too much of the actual logic of the sentence when I made it up. But what you're saying is that, both swap - so if we take a simpler example like "Jeg trodde at det ikke gikk an og at det ikke var fornuftig" - both would swap as a result? 
Just looking at my desktop here and it says "Temaet som ikke er lagret" - is this the same rule? Temaet er ikke lagret, but, "Temaet som ikke er lagret"? (So i'd say 'en mann som ikke kan løpe, dyr som ikke er store osv?)

Thanks!


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> Ahh yes, I guess I didn't think too much of the actual logic of the sentence when I made it up. But what you're saying is that, both swap - so if we take a simpler example like "Jeg trodde at det ikke gikk an og at det ikke var fornuftig" - both would swap as a result?
> Just looking at my desktop here and it says "Temaet som ikke er lagret" - is this the same rule? Temaet er ikke lagret, but, "Temaet som ikke er lagret"? (So i'd say 'en mann som ikke kan løpe, dyr som ikke er store osv?)
> 
> Thanks!


Exactly


----------



## sjiraff

Ah I see, I -think- I finally get it now. I'll probably still screw up and lose track in sentences but I guess that comes with practice!

Jo mer man øver, destro bedre blir man!


----------



## Ben Jamin

It is a wonder that native speakers recognize main clauses and subordinate clauses instinctively, without knowing the rules.


----------



## sjiraff

Ben Jamin said:


> It is a wonder that native speakers recognize main clauses and subordinate clauses instinctively, without knowing the rules.



It's funny you say that, I've asked around three or four native speakers about this, and asked them "Why do you place the order differently here and here?" and they all said the same thing "Uhh, I don't know, it just sounds right, can't say why though" hehe.


----------



## sjiraff

Apologies for bumping this thread, but today I got corrected for getting the subordinate wrong again and I'm kind of confused.

I said something along the lines of: Jeg føler meg engstelig når jeg *skal snart* ha en matteprøve

But then I "corrected" myself, swapping it to "....når jeg *snart skal *ha...." Which apparently is wrong, but I thought after "Når" there was a swap, for example "Når det *ikke er* noe mat blir jeg sulten" (As oppossed to, "når det er ikke" (which is wrong)

So I'm not sure if snart is treated different from words like ikke and aldri, I just assumed it was any adjective that would be swapped after "når" falling under subordinate clause?

Thank you.


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> So I'm not sure if snart is treated different from words like ikke and aldri, I just assumed it was any adjective that would be swapped after "når" falling under subordinate clause?
> 
> Thank you.


_All_ sentential adverbs (not adjectives) behave the same way with respect to this. Thus, _s__nart_ falls into the same category as _ikke, aldri etc._


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> _All_ sentential adverbs (not adjectives) behave the same way with respect to this. Thus, _s__nart_ falls into the same category as _ikke, aldri etc._



This is what I thought, but when I corrected myself from:

...når jeg skal snart ta en matteprøve

to

...når jeg snart skal ta en matteprøve

He said it was wrong the second time!


----------



## myšlenka

He is right, it _is_ wrong, but not because of the syntax. The problem is the semantics.

I would rephrase it: jeg er engstelig siden jeg skal ha matteprøve snart.


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> He is right, it _is_ wrong, but not because of the syntax. The problem is the semantics.
> 
> I would rephrase it: jeg er engstelig siden jeg skal ha matteprøve snart.



Hmm, I know it wasn't exactly the best worded sentence (I was trying to remember just to give an example) - but what do you mean the semantics? I thought after "Når" it would swap in accordance to the subordinate clause?

Thanks


----------



## myšlenka

When you write _når jeg snart skal ha...._, it's difficult for me to interpret what time your sentence refers to. I don't understand the meaning (the semantics). Probably because _når_ and _snart_ have conflicting temporal interpretations.


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> When you write _når jeg snart skal ha...._, it's difficult for me to interpret what time your sentence refers to. I don't understand the meaning (the semantics). Probably because _når_ and _snart_ have conflicting temporal interpretations.



Hmm...it's kind of tricky for me to get my head around to be honest, I guess it will come with practice. I suppose to be safe, I could always word things like "Når jeg skal ta en matteprøve snart." Right?

Thanks


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> Hmm...it's kind of tricky for me to get my head around to be honest, I guess it will come with practice. I suppose to be safe, I could always word things like "Når jeg skal ta en matteprøve snart." Right?
> 
> Thanks


Changing the word order doesn't help. Maybe it's just me, but I have problems interpreting the aspectual/temporal parts of the sentence.


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> Changing the word order doesn't help. Maybe it's just me, but I have problems interpreting the aspectual/temporal parts of the sentence.



Oh I see, I actually think the sentence was more like "jeg hater den følelsen når jeg skal snart ta en prøve" (jeg gruer meg for det, når jeg har matteprøver i vente!)


----------



## raumar

It's not just you, myšlenka - at least I have the same problem. "Når" indicates something general and recurring, and "snart" indicates that you are talking about a single event in the near future. Alternative ways of expressing this might be "jeg hater den følelsen jeg får før en matteprøve" or "jeg gruer meg alltid før en matteprøve".


----------



## myšlenka

The only problem is that the very same template seems to work fine in other contexts. I found these sentences online:
_- Blir veldig spennende når jeg snart skal ha første prøve med en av de nye lærerne mine_ [...]
- _Emlakremen gjør at Rasmus nesten ikke kjenner stikket når han snart skal få veneflon.
_


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> The only problem is that the very same template seems to work fine in other contexts. I found these sentences online:
> _- Blir veldig spennende når jeg snart skal ha første prøve med en av de nye lærerne mine_ [...]
> - _Emlakremen gjør at Rasmus nesten ikke kjenner stikket når han snart skal få veneflon.
> _


Yeah, I guess if my example was a bit confusing logically it's my bad but I was really just trying to focus on the word order rule, I guess I was badly trying to say in Norwegian how when we say in english "I hate that feeling when you have a test soon" or something. But nevertheless assumed the word order would change in accordance to the subordinate rule, just as you posted! But the Norwegian guy corrected it to "skal snart" instead.


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> But the Norwegian guy corrected it to "skal snart" instead.


The word order _når jeg skal snart ha..._ is very very awkward.


----------



## Ben Jamin

myšlenka said:


> The word order _når jeg skal snart ha..._ is very very awkward.


I even think that the words don't match, I can't even think about a sentence with such words ocurring together.
But: "siden jeg snart skal ha", "ettersom jeg snart skal ha", "fordi jeg snart skal ha", eller "da jeg snart skal ha" are legitimate, aren't they?


----------



## sjiraff

Ben Jamin said:


> I even think that the words don't match, I can't even think about a sentence with such words ocurring together.
> But: "siden jeg snart skal ha", "ettersom jeg snart skal ha", "fordi jeg snart skal ha", eller "da jeg snart skal ha" are legitimate, aren't they?


The first three are, but I don't think the last one "da jeg snart skal ha" makes logical sense?

If you mean "da" as in "then.." it would be "Da skal jeg snart ha", or if you mean it as "when" (den gangen da...) it would have to be "da jeg snart skulle ha" (When I was soon to have) since in that word order "da" means "when". I think, if I'm wrong I'm sure a native can correct me.


----------



## myšlenka

Ben Jamin said:


> I even think that the words don't match, I can't even think about a sentence with such words ocurring together.


I quoted some in #20 so they do occur together, just not in the order verb+adverb.



sjiraff said:


> The first three are, but I don't think the last one "da jeg snart skal ha" makes logical sense?


_da_ can also mean "as".


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> _da_ can also mean "as".



Oh I had no idea, "as" as in, "fordi"? (Like, I can't talk now *as *I shall soon have a test!)


----------



## myšlenka

sjiraff said:


> Oh I had no idea, "as" as in, "fordi"? (Like, I can't talk now *as *I shall soon have a test!)


Yes, that's right. However, it's mainly used in formal written language. I perceive it as rather pretentious


----------



## sjiraff

myšlenka said:


> Yes, that's right. However, it's mainly used in formal written language. I perceive it as rather pretentious



Oh I see haha, well good to remember in case I ever see it nevertheless. Vil ikke at folk skal oppfatte meg som selvopptatt!


----------



## bicontinental

myšlenka said:


> The only problem is that the very same template seems to work fine in other contexts. I found these sentences online:
> _- Blir veldig spennende når jeg snart skal ha første prøve med en av de nye lærerne mine_ [...]
> - _Emlakremen gjør at Rasmus nesten ikke kjenner stikket når han snart skal få veneflon.
> _



  I don´t think it´s the same use of “når” in these two examples; “når” in the OP´s sentence is referring to a repetitive or habitual action which creates a chronological conflict with the apparent single event implied by “snart”
  In each of your examples, “...når jeg snart skal ha første prøve.”..”når han snart skal få veneflon”, the “når” points to a single event in the future like “når han dør…”, ”når jeg har spist”...  ”Snart” modifies the timing of this (near) future event.

  Ref: http://www.nob-ordbok.uio.no/perl/ordbok.cgi?OPP=når&begge=+&ordbok=begge&ava=ava second entry, *når om framtid:* på det tidspunkt da, så snart som *vs*. *Når om det som hender ofte el. vanlig*: hver gang som, så ofte som.
  Bic.


----------



## myšlenka

bicontinental said:


> I don´t think it´s the same use of “når” in these two examples [...]


I am aware of this but I don't understand what forces a repetitive interpretation of _når_ in OP's sentence.


----------



## bicontinental

myšlenka said:


> I am aware of this but I don't understand what forces a repetitive interpretation of _når_ in OP's sentence.





> _Jeg føler meg engstelig når jeg *skal snart* ha en matteprøve_


 (post #10). I agree that this sentence in and of itself is ambiguous with respect to the meaning of “når”…but it was paraphrased and clarified in post #19,  





> _jeg gruer meg *alltid* før en matteprøve_


 which of course indicates a habitual action. 

Bic.


----------



## myšlenka

bicontinental said:


> (post #10). I agree that this sentence in and of itself is ambiguous with respect to the meaning of “når”…but it was paraphrased and clarified in post #19,   which of course indicates a habitual action.
> 
> Bic.


I don't know if OP was talking about a habitual thing or a single event in the near future, but in either case, the sentence doesn't fit. In this context, _når_ isn't ambiguous and if ambiguity was the issue here, it would be a straighforward case.

_1) Jeg føler meg engstelig når jeg snart skal ha en matteprøve_. 
2) _Blir veldig spennende når jeg snart skal ha første prøve med en av de nye lærerne mine_ [...]
3) _Emlakremen gjør at Rasmus nesten ikke kjenner stikket når han snart skal få veneflon_.

All of these have the same structure and refer to a single event in the (near) future. The interpretation of _når_ (a single event) is unproblematic for 2) and 3), but not in 1) in spite of having the same structure and the same reference to a single event (en matteprøve). For sentence 1), I feel forced to understand _når_ as marking habituality.

 While I was writing this, it occurred to me that 1) is acceptable as a single future event given that it is uttered in a documentary


----------



## raumar

Actually, "_jeg gruer meg alltid før en matteprøve_" was my interpretation. Bic, maybe you meant to refer to Sjiraff's explanation in post # 18:



sjiraff said:


> (jeg gruer meg for det, når jeg har matteprøver i vente!)


----------



## bicontinental

myšlenka said:


> While I was writing this, it occurred to me that 1) is acceptable as a single future event given that it is uttered in a documentary



...provided that the documentary is a reliable linguistic source 

Bic.

PS: Raumar, you're right, of course...


----------

