The word BAKKEN has more than one meaning. The discussion between AnnaB and sondrec is confusion because you discuss both meanings of this word.
In the sentence ANDEN ER NEDE PÅ BAKKEN the word BAKKEN means ON THE GROUND. The word NEDE is not necessary in this sentence. ANDEN ER PÅ BAKKEN means exactly the same.
I am not on the ladder, I am on the ground would be JEG ER IKKE PÅ STIGEN, JEG ER (NEDE) PÅ BAKKEN.
The word BAKKEN can also mean THE SLOPE, THE HILL.
You can not say JEG ER NED BAKKEN and mean I am on the ground. It is ANDEN ER PÅ BAKKEN. PÅ is the essential word here.
You could say JEG GÅR NED BAKKEN. This means I AM WALKING DOWN THE SLOPE. JEG ER NEDE I BAKKEN means that I am in the middle of the slope. This is something you could say in a hillside prepared for slalom skiing.
Jeg håper dette hjalp.
AnnaB: I denne setningen har Duolingo valgt å bruke ANDEN. Dette er normal bokmål. Du bruker ANDA. Dette er radikal bokmål. Normalt velger Duolingo radikal bokmål med a-endinger. Hvert år blir det færre mennesker som snakker radikal bokmål, dvs det blir færre som bruker a-endinger. Det må være ekstra forvirrende for dem som forsøker å lære norsk at man blander normal og radikal bokmål.
Yes but I am not sure exactely where something that is past the hill would be.. You could say "anda er nedenfor bakken" or "anda er bortenfor bakken". What is abolutely certain is that you cannot say "anda er ned bakken". "Ned" implies thet there is movement, so "er" is the wrong verb, you could use "går" (walks), "løper" (runs).
@ sondrec. Bokmålsordboka (and Nynoskordboka) gives the following definitions: Nede (prep): På et sted som ligger lavere enn et annet. (At a place lying lower than another) Ned (adv): Fra høyere til lavere grad, trinn, nivå eller lignende (From a higher to a lower grade, step, level etc.) www.nob-ordbok.uio.no
I don't know if ther might be differences in dialect that could explain our disagreement, but the course is based on standard Norwegian bokmål. It is also not .."ned bakken.." that is the problem in your sentence, it is the verb "er" witch does not express any motion.
Depending on what you want to express you could say "Anda går ned bakken" (The duck is walking down the hill)
or "anda er nede i bakken" (the duck is down in the hill) or perhaps better "Anda er i bunnen av bakken" ( the duck is at the bottom of the hill) if you want to say that it is not actually standing in the hill.
Yes, absolutely. 'Anden er på bakken' is a bit strange. In a real situation you would use 'ligger' or 'står' instead of just 'er'. At least I would. Other examples: 'Genseren din ligger på bakken' (Your sweater is on the ground). I would not say: 'Genseren din er på bakken.'
If you read the comments you'll see that 'Anden er på bakken' is possible. However, it is better to say 'Anden ligger\står på bakken. As you can see from my comments above, 'Genseren din ligger på bakken' is better than 'Genseren din er på bakken.' But you can say: 'Genseren din er på kjøkkenet.' or 'Genseren din ligger på kjøkkenet.' Both are good.
If i remember well, "under" implies the presence of something above you (anden ligger under bordet: the duck lies under the table), "nede" describes rather a position in the space, having some place in an upper position. In many cases you can use both to describe the same situation, but in a different way. I guess, for example, that if we are on the second floor waiting for our friends still on the ground floor, we can either say "de er nede, i første etasje" (referring exclusively to their position) or "de er under oss, i første etasje" (referring to their position compared to ours).
Out of curiosity, I keep missing bakken all the time writing "the floor". In my language there is no difference between the floor and the ground. I believe in English either. Is it bakken maybe reserved in Norwegian for a natural ground or you can say bakken for the floor in your house as well? It's hard enough to find logic for all the different multiple location prepositions. And yes, this lesson should've been split in two - prepositions and all the location nouns. It's like 3-4 of the previous lessons in one.
Clearly. But is there any difference? Can you use på gulvet for something on the street, something on the ground in the forest, etc... Trying to catch that. When I'm imagining bakken I'm imagining a hilly slope or a mound as a whole. Since it's used for the ground as well, does it imply only such type of ground?
Excellent, now the things are clarified. Thanks! So the bakken is every floor outside the house. I don't know if English makes difference for the floor as a pavement. In my native language, when you say floor it can be referred to anything man-made. Simply ground is more natural walking surface, including dusty muddy things like forest roads :)
English does distinguish as well; floors are made and are inside something, usually, whereas the ground is outside and is made of dirt/rock. Same as the Norwegian gulvet/bakken distinction. It's just that some people care when you say one and mean the other, and others don't!