We don't have a separate word for that in Norwegian, but you can describe the bread as 'hardt/tørt/gammelt' (hard/dry/old) to get the meaning across.
'Ståle' is just a name in Norwegian. I think the translations are crowdsourced, so whoever added it probably didn't give much thought to how confusing it might be to people looking it up.
PS: I did add 'stale' as an accepted option for the sentence after your first post, so don't worry about that. It's definitely a good English translation, even if we don't have a direct Norwegian counterpart. :)
Is the connotation of the original sentence here meant to convey that the bread is tørt/gammelt? If not, "crusty" makes a lot more sense than hard, dry, or old. Crusty bread is desirable. Bread that is hard, dry, or old is not.
No. Knekkebrød is knekkebrød in Norway like it is in Sweden, while 'hardt brød' is a regular loaf of bread that has either gone old and stale, or is baked out of rye and bricks.
It depends on the article that goes along with the noun. The adjective takes on the added -t if you're dealing with the "et"-article.
Et pledd er mykt / Pleddet er mykt.
En pannekake er myk / Pannekaken er myk.
The former is just an indefinite noun modified by an adjective, while the latter is a complete sentence containing a definite noun, a conjugated verb, and an adjective.
Why do we add a "t" at the end of "hardt" when there's no "et" in this sentence? Isn't "bread" here like a plural word?