1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Restauranten ligger ved side…

"Restauranten ligger ved siden av butikken."

Translation:The restaurant lies next to the shop.

May 22, 2015



Am I the only one that hears "g" in restauranten?


That's the correct pronunciation. :)

'-ent' and '-ant' is often pronounced as '-ang' in French loanwords.


It's not arbitrary. It's close to its french pronunciation, but not quite. I like this compromise, as doing that nasal N thing is difficult for me, particularly with throaty Rs before it.


Sid(en) = The side?


Correct! Literally this sentences reads "The restaurant lies by the side of the shop"


but "siden" means "since" in english when I check the dictionary. And in one exercise I translated "butikken" as "shop" and it marked incorrect. Maybe it is a bug. So is "shop" the best translation for "butikken"?


"Siden" has several meanings: https://ordbok.uib.no/perl/ordbok.cgi?OPP=siden

For the other, you should check the discussions of the particular sentence. But in general for meaning of butikk, see: https://ordbok.uib.no/perl/ordbok.cgi?OPP=butikk


Would it be correct to say "Restauranten er ved siden av butikken"? I don't quite understand the use of the word ligger here.


yes, that would mean the same. In English you say that something sits ... in Norwegian things 'ligger' . In my dictionary I found this example: 'The parcel is sitting on the table.' In Norwegian we normally say: Pakken ligger på bordet.'


Hmm do Norwegians prefer personification of inanimate objects?

ie. "The parcel IS on the table" vs "The parcel LIES on the table"

and "the glass IS behind the plate" vs "the glass STANDS behind the plate"


I would say: Pakken ligger på bordet, pakken er på kjøkkenet, pakken kom med posten, men den ligger i bilen (I forgot it in the car), glasset står bak tallerkenen, glassene er i skapet til høyre.

Butikken som vi snakket om i går, er i Oslo. Den ligger ved siden av den fine, franske restauranten, i nærheten av banken.

This would be normal sentences in a Norwegian conversation about a shop, a restaurant and a bank.


I understand when to use står or ligger for most things. With a restaurant or house, my gut reaction would be to use står instead.

Would it be interchangeable for certain things like a restaurant?


No, 'Restauranten står ved siden av butikken.' is very strange. However, you could say: 'Restauranten er ved siden av butikken.' I think I would say that, rather than use the word 'ligger'. If we are going to meet at a restaurant, and you don't know exactly where it is, and you ask me: Where is it exactly? I would say: 'Den er ved siden av butikken.'


I do not really get why "står" cannot be used in that sentence.. anyone could help me? As far as I remember, there were sentences which used "står" with inanimate objects (like a chair or a table). Then, why wouldn't that work in this case?


Just wondering: can butik be translated as "boutique," too?


"Butikk" is just a general word for all kinds of places where you can buy things. So you could translate "boutique" to "butikk", but not the other way around


Is the siden av really necessary for this sentence?


I'm certainly not an expert, but when I looked up "ved" alone, it said "at," so I think you could think of "ved siden av" as more "at the side of" than "beside."


Though is there a difference between "at the side of" and "beside"?


From my understanding ved means "by" as well, ved siden av is like saying "beside of" or literally "by the side of". I believe ved would work too


So in theory you could say "Restauranten ligger ved butikken."?


Yes, it sounds just fine.


It is not exactly the same. The word ved means that it is in the same area, but it does not have to be next to the shop. Ved siden av means that it is very close, no other houses in between.


How could someone make a question for an answer like this? "Hvor er restauranten?" or "Hvor ligger restauranten?"


Why "siden" is not traslated as "side". "siden" in Google Translate = "since".


Words can have several meanings, and "siden" can mean both "the side" and "since".

"Ved siden av" as a fixed phrase translates to "next to".


Thank you Deliciae. On the Google Translate all the possible translations are "since". Thats why this tool is too far to be perfect. Can "ved siden av" also mean "in the side of"?


You would not say "lies" in this context in English... You would say "stands". But that does not matter, it is just very interesting to learn these differences.


The usual way to translate Germanic languages to English just uses the verb "to be" for locations of things that use a range of verbs such as the "ligger" here. Duolingo normally does this too so I'm surprised to see the overly literal unnatural English translation used this time.


The speaker sounded like she said "en" restauranten


Would it be possible to add "along side" as a translation?


What's the difference between "ved" and "ved siden av"?


ved = by - the restaurant is roughly in the same area as the shop.

ved siden av = adjacent/next to - the restaurant and the shop share a wall, or at least are right next to each other.


"ved", "av", "pa" what are the differences between these??


In English we wouldn't say "lies by the store". We would say "is by the store (or shop)" OR "is next to the store".


Does it make any sense restaurant 'lies' in Norsk grammar?


If I've understood correctly, you can oppose "setter" which designates something that "stands" on a surface, and "ligger" which designates something that "lies" on a surface. I suppose that a building is considered to be laid on the concrete... Maybe I'm not making sense, sorry..


Do "står ved siden av", "ligger ved siden av", and "er ved siden av" all mean approximately the same thing?


The voices of the speakers are changed today. Am I wrong?


In English, at least where I'm from (midwest/Eastern USA), it would either be "is next to" or "sits next to" ("beside" could be used in either).

We wouldn't use "lies" or "stands." We'd understand what you meant, but it's awkward.

When something "stands next to" something else, it implies that at least one of the two things is impressive, historical, amazing... "The hotel stands next to the Southern overlook of the Grand Canyon."

Something like that. It's a weird nuance.


I was forced to choose "lies next to" here when writing the English translation, but it feels a little unnatural to say that for a restaurant. Should "lies" be acceptable in this context in English. I can understand "stands" or perhaps "sits" would be ok?


'The restaurant lies beside the store' is incorrect?


Despite typing the right answer, it still shows incorrect. This lesson is faulty.


"The restaurant is beside the store." This is not accepted, yet conveys the same meaning, as in, next door to the restaurant is the store. Am I missing something in this sentence, or should I report it?


The restaurant lies next to the boutique should be accepted, I presume?


Next to the store, not the boutique.

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