1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Da de kom hjem, hadde hunden…

"Da de kom hjem, hadde hunden dødd."

Translation:When they came home, the dog had died.

November 7, 2015



First a woman discovered in a lake now this? I'm literally just about to sleep don't give me nightmares


this happened to me unfortunately :(


They really are helpless home alone. A word of caution learned the hard way by my relatives, be extremely careful who you trust with them while on vacation.


I dread the thought that the term "dieded" could become part of official English someday in the future, due to the internet culture. :D "did he dieded?"


Aye 'e did dieded 'e did.


okay so now we know which Norwegian tense is the darkest...


It's nearly impossible to tell if the woman doing the voiceovers is saying "vi" or "de". Is that just her, or is it always as hard to tell them apart in Norwegian speech?


I have trouble both with that in this voiceover, as well as in distinguishing between whether the voice is saying "hunden" or "hun".


I often have trouble hearing the difference between 'vi' and 'de'.

Sometimes it's hard to heard the difference between 'hun' and 'hunden' and sometimes (as here) context isn't enough...


It can be a bit difficult, but on the slow version of listening excercises she usually pronounces it better. Otherwise, the difference between V and D should be as distinct as in english.


Learning a new language is really the cure of depression!


Noooo. It is well known that everyone can die but the doggies. Don't you ever make a movie/book/sentence in which the dogs die. Cruel.


Oh wow - thanks for a cheerful Norwegian lesson. Hunden min sitter ved min side (is that right?). How do you say "very much alive"?


Ok. I keep getting dinged for the order of "noun/pronoun - verb" in the second half of a sentence.

In this case, it's "hadde hunden." In the previous sentence (which I also just got dinged for - "Det koster mye mer enn hva vi hadde trodd."), it's "vi hadde."

How can I tell which goes first in instances like these where each sentence has an introductory portion? Is it merely the presence of a comma?


The difference between "Da de kom hjem, hadde hunden dødd" and "Det koster mye mer enn hva vi hadde trodd" is that the second part of the second sentence starts with a question word 'hva'. Inversion of the subject and verb leads to a question. So rather than saying "It costs more than what we had thought" your translation said "It costs more than what had we thought?"

When a subordinate clause is fronted in a sentence I think a comma is required before the verb of the main clause. So, that could be a clue to use when translating from the written word.

Lykke til!


Why is it "hadde hunden" and not "hunden hadde"?


Tecnically, it can be explaind by Norwegian being a V2 language, where the verb comes in second position. So when you have a clause before the main sentence, the verb will move to the front so it will be the second constituent. It's similar to German in that respect.


upvote in memory of tyr


Was tyr your dog? Or are you referring to tyr and fenrir?


Well, my day was already going badly so...


You have the perfect pic for that comment!


Why isn't it, "Da kom de hjem, hadde hunden dødd"?


The main verb in this sentence is "hadde", not "kom", so if you're thinking of the V2 rule, it applies to "hadde", not "kom".


The translation isn't wrong, per se, but the English sentence is really awkward.

We'd say: "When they got home, they found that the dog had died." Or maybe we'd say: "By the time they got home, the dog had died." Or the inversion: "The dog had died by the time they got home."

Or if you were writing a novel: "When they came home, it was to a dead dog."


Seems perfectly fine to me (UK). The sentence describes the scene they perceived on arriving home. I think that's implied, and doesn't necessarily need to be made explicit by tying the arrival to the scene with "they found" or similar.


That was my thought too.

Why isn't it, " Da de kom hjem, hadde {de funnet} hunden hadde dødd?


I'm not sure which sentence you intended it to be, but I can see two possibilities:

1) "Da de kom hjem, hadde hunden hadde dødd". That one is not correct, because you don't use two "hadde" in this way. Only the first one should be there because you only need one, and also because you should follow the placement rule for verbs in a dependent clause.

2) "Da de kom hjem, hadde de funnet hunden hadde dødd". That one is not correct either, because there is something missing. The phrase "hadde de funnet" needs a noun or a noun phrase as an object. So you could for example say "Da de kom hjem, hadde de funnet den døde hunden". But the meaning of the sentence would not be the same as teh one in the task. It would sound more like they had already found the dead dog before they came home, and not that they found the dead dog upon arriving. For that you would have to use the simple past form of the verb -> "Da de kom hjem, fant de den døde hunden". Another possibility is to say "Da de kom hjem, fant de ut at hunden hadde dødd." -> "When they got home, they discovered/found that the dog had died."


Geez, really? Who makes these up


I mean, just because it's another language doesn't mean bad things never happen!


I wish I could have a chance to repeat the sentence.


I am frustrated by the lack of distinction in the pronunciation between the DE and the VI.

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