1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Kvinnen var ingen typisk lær…

"Kvinnen var ingen typisk lærer."

Translation:The woman was no typical teacher.

September 30, 2015



Why is it "ingen" and not "ikke"? I don't get it.


Kvinnen var ikke en typisk lærer - The woman was not a typical teacher.

Ikke - not. Ingen - no.


Why was my sentence "The woman was not a typical teacher" accepted then? Shouldn't the point of using 'ingen' be to distinguish it from 'ikke' and hence not allow people to use one for the other even if it means the same?


Is it possible to say "ordinary", or is that another word?


I would not liken ordinary and typical in this context, not in their Norwegian forms "ordinær og typisk" anyway. "Ingen ordinær lærer" could mean she wasn't really a teacher, maybe she was an engineer and just a substitute/extra teacher for a project, meaning she was something different from a teacher but she was teaching at the time nonetheless. "Ingen typisk lærer" says she is a teacher, but different from the rest of the teachers.


"The woman was no ordinary teacher" was indeed accepted for me in English when presented with the Norwegian sentence. (Mar 2017)

(Which is not to say ordinary should or should not be accepted in all sentences as a translation of typisk, just that it felt appropriate for this particular sentence.)

For non-native-English speakers: The English forms ordinary and typical are fairly close in this sentence. Grydolva's excellent comments for "Ingen ordinær lærer" would more closely align with "She's not ordinarily a teacher."


norsklærer Karense!


why can't it be the woman was no "normal" teacher


It probably should except that, I will report it!


Seems like the sound on the slow setting wasn't quite on.


You wrote 'was not a typical teacher', which is 'ikke'. The sentence is 'no typical teacher', which requires 'ingen'. I think that's right.

Learn Norwegian (Bokmål) in just 5 minutes a day. For free.