1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Treet står bortenfor huset."

"Treet står bortenfor huset."

Translation:The tree is past the house.

June 16, 2015



One thing I wondered about is what really differentiates "bortenfor" and "forbi". Is bortenfor more to do when describing something which is static, but forbi is more often used when combined with a verb of movement, like going past something?


Correct. You could say that you're going "forbi" one house to get a better look at the house which is "bortenfor" it.

"Forbi" can also be used with other "action" verbs, you can for instance look "forbi" something, but "bortenfor" is mainly used with "is/lies/is located". You could say that one car is driving "bortenfor" the other, but that would mean that it's driving on the far side of the other car, not that it's passing it, so it's still about the location (relative to the other car) rather than the movement.


Thanks a lot! Mainly be using ordnett.no and it doesn't make the physical distinction too clear. I just seem to remember seeing "forbi" used a fair bit when reading about movement. One moment that sticks out is Harry Potter looking out the window of the Hogwarts Express and he talked about objects using "forbi". Of course, I am reading the Norwegian translated versions. Work well side-by-side with the English originals, and another book to keep them from springing up and maintaining a line of sights. Will take a while to get all the wordplay, very well translated. Might see if my Einar Haugen dictionary is still around. Maybe it offers more clarity on matters, but glad we have a community of educated, kind people like yourself. Cheers!


Bare hyggelig! I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the Norwegian translation of Harry Potter, I've heard good things about it as well.

I added a small edit to my post above, as yours spurred me to nuance it a little. It's a little less clear cut now, but as you can see it's still about movement/action vs. location - just that the location may involve movement.


Thank you for clearing that up. Will add that to the Anki deck, but it is good that I was getting a sense of that distinction naturally. I try to do at least half my time spent with Norwegian reading and looking up the vocabulary. I find it helps cement the grammar and true connotations of words through the many contexts you see them in, much like a native does when they first learn.

I find the program "Learning With Texts" an excellent resource for reading text you can import and then looking up unknown words and have them automatically looked up in a dictionary with a full display of the range of translations. I am glad I found a username and password for ordnett.no as no other online dictionary cuts it.

If you are interested in checking out Learning with Texts, which is like a free, more flexible version of LingQ where you can set your own dictionary and don't have to quite frequently frown at a wall of lazy translations, it could prove useful to you. Can be configured for most any language. Takes a bit to install and get going but well worth. Det kan jeg si uten tvil!


If you have for whatever reason not tried LingQ in the past and would like a slightly bigger explanation I will provide one, though you should find a video on that site which should do the job.

If you do want to try it and find it confusing at first, just stick with the instructions carefully. They will see you through and it all gets natural quickly. Wish more people were aware of this software and how it can immensely through the stage of relying on native content almost completely.


That sounds like a good routine! Reading is my preferred mode of learning as well, and I quite enjoy the "Immersion" here though it's sadly not available for Norwegian.

Thank you for the tip as well, it looks promising. Unfortunately I haven't got much time left over for doing any language learning of my own at the moment, but I'll bookmark it for later.


Hi Steven, I tried to install LWT but got stuck at step 5. I do not have data subfolder. Do you happen to know the solution? Thx a lot


Why 'the tree is standing behind the house' is incorrect? Duo is saying that behind is wrong.


because past doesn't necessarily mean behind. if an object is past a person and the person is walking towards it, then it would actually be in front of them.


But at the very moment that the statement is being made, behind and beyond do refer to the same location.
And if you walk past both of them, the tree then is neither before nor beyond the house but in front of it.


"Bortenfor" only means farther away than something (in the same general direction), not completely on the other side of it and out of sight.


because if the tree is down the road from the house, its still past the house but not behind it

[deactivated user]

    Does it still make sense without the står? Treet bortenfor huset?'


    It makes sense, but it is not a full sentence. It would be the same as "The tree beyond the house" in English.

    [deactivated user]

      Thanks Alek.


      what is the different between "beyond the house" and " behind the house" ?


      Past the house... Doesn't that depend of from where you're coming?


      Why would it not be "Treet er bortenfor huset"?


      You will often hear sentences in English which are technically grammatically correct, but sound unnatural due to the word choice when said by some foreigners. Just that situation here, it is just the way they phrase it and have a specific verb choice which seems odd to us, but is natural in Norwegian.


      Oh ok, so the sentence "treet er bortenfor huset" isn't an incorrect sentence, its just a weird way of saying it?


      Or at least, norwegians would consider it a weird way of saying it?


      Exactly. Though I can't speak on the subject like a native, I am half-Norwegian and have been exposed to Norwegian since I was a baby; though you could easily say "er" in the situation and be fully understood without question, people would very likely find it a slightly odd way of phrasing it.

      When it comes to speaking about the location of things in Norwegian they tend to stick to using specific verbs for specific nouns, certain kinds of objects etc., and you just need to pick it up from exposure if you want to sound more natural.


      Tusen takk! This was very helpful


      It's not very weird. It's just an alternative way of saying it. It's less common, though, but perfectly usable.


      is "bortenfor" the same as "nedenfor" ?


      "Nedenfor" implies a drop in elevation relative to the reference point, while "bortenfor" doesn't specify that.


      I am not sure if it my hearing, but it sounds like it is saying "tusa". Or is that just me?


      It sounds like boo-ten-for for bortenfor!

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