1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Det hører fortiden til."

"Det hører fortiden til."

Translation:That belongs to the past.

June 16, 2015



Is the object always before the particle in Norwegian phrasal verbs? Or could it be also "Det hører til fortiden" ?


Either placement would be fine for this sentence, but with this particular expression it's more common to place "fortiden" before the particle.

Generally, however, the particles tend to prefer cosying up to their verbs.


could you also use tilhører in this sentence? then how would the sentence look like? Det tilhører barna?


Same doubt. Someone help us


"Det tilhører fortiden." is accepted.


Does anyone know why so many Indo-European languages make association between "hearing" and "belonging, protecting"? It is not only Nors. tilhøre, Germ. gehören, Dutch behoren, but also in some Slavic languages (like Bulgarian) the verb for 'to hear' can also mean 'to protect'...


I suspect it's something along the lines of that which hears you - that which you can call upon - is yours. If you can call upon a resource, or a person, they are yours, figuratively; if a dog listens to you, it is yours. We are animists until taught otherwise; the implication is of a relationship between agents, rather than an agent possessing a thing. The oldest form of wealth was livestock: something yours, to keep and to guard.


Home is where the h(ear)t is? Maybe that phrase got lost in translation and then people got confused. /s


Can I say ' It belongs to the past '?


So Swedish has verbs the split up like German? Like "Fernsehen" goes to "Ich sehe fern?"


Norwegian has phrasal verbs such as "å høre til" if that is what you mean. Sometimes you can move the preposition to the front of the verb and join them and get a verb such as "å tilhøre" in this case, which means the same. Note that it might not always mean the same, often it has a more formal or abstract meaning.


So the addition of "til", either as a prefix or after the object, is what changes the meaning of hører from "is hearing" to "belongs"?



There are a couple of other prepositions that also bring a sense of belonging to 'hører', but have more specific uses. Neither of these can be used as prefixes:

å høre hjemme = to belong (somewhere)
å høre sammen = to belong together, be two parts of the same thing


Then « Det hører hjemme byen » means "it belongs in the city"? Or is hjemme meant to be an example? Eg: it belongs at home.


You need to add another preposition for it to work:

"De hører hjemme i byen."


Mr.Anonimus: It's not so good Norwegian. Its is better to say "Det hører til i byen" meaning "It belongs in the city".


Instead of that why couldn't i say "det tilhører i byen", or that is not correct?


But for example, do "Jeg hører hjemme" and "Jeg tilhører hjemme" and "Jeg hører hjemme til" all mean the same? (I belong home)?

I'm a bit confused.


They are all incorrect.. (including the English sentence).


Ohh man.. and it gets even mer interessant!!! X)


Does it matter, when we aren't speaking about belong to a place, whether å tilhøre or å høre til are used? And when we are speaking about belong somewhere, do we always use å høre hjemme?

Also does til come after or before the direct object?


Mange takk, Alek!! Det er så interessant!


Indiana Jones: Time Traveler


Literally it would be "Det er i fortiden", but that is not good Norwegian. "Det hører til fortiden" (it belongs to the past) works best I think!


Betyr "å høre til" det samme som "å tilhøre"?


"Å høre til" deals with belonging in a wider sense, while "å tilhøre" deals with ownership.

A skirt "tilhører" you, because you're its owner, but it "hører til" a skirt+jacket set or in a particular place in your wardrobe.


^This^ is, to me at least, the most useful explanation of the subtle difference between 'å tilhører' and 'å høre til' thus far. Thank you, Deliciae! :-)


How do you say "It belongs in a museum!" ?


Let me try this: They would say: det tilhører museet OR det hører til museet There are two ways to say it, as I understand


This is signifying it is the museum owning whatever "it" is.


Det hører hjemme i et museum


Correct me if I'm wrong - I think this this implies that the object in questions has a sense of belonging to a museum--like it senses that it should be in a museum. It's a bit too close to a mistranslated English idiom. Like, "Your scarf is so beautiful, it belongs in a museum." It's as if the scarf knows that it should be in a museum because it senses "home" there. "Det hører til et museum," implies more that "It belongs to a museum." "Det tilhører et museum," implies that there is a specific museum that it belongs to, but it's not being named.

Native speakers want to weigh in on this?


Det bør være i et museum. Idiomatically, we often say that something "belongs somewhere" when we're trying to express that it "ought to/should be somehwere."


Im not sure what this phrase actually means in english. Can someone clarify?


What's the literal translation? That hears in the past?


See the above explanation(s) by alek_d and Deliciae: å tilhøre / å høre til means to belong to

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