1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Studentene har vansker med å…

"Studentene har vansker med å høre professoren."

Translation:The students have difficulty hearing the professor.

July 6, 2015



prof turns up the volume of the mic

Prof: "Can you hear me now?"

Students: "Yes, but we still don't understand"


If I took out the "med" here, would the sentence be conveying the same meaning?


It would be garbage.


Is "med" usage idiomatic? I do not get when to use it. For example which one is right? "jeg kan ikke vente med å prøve" or "jeg kan ikke vente å prøve"


I have been wondering the same and checked a few pages. It seems that in Norwegian "å vente" can mean: wait, await, anticipate. There are several ways in which it connects with other words in the sentence.

  1. You can have no "follow up", so sentences such: I am waiting (Jeg venter), Can you wait here a few minutes? (Kan du vente her noen minutter?), Wait and see (Vent og se)

  2. You can have a noun after and then you need to use "på" after, such as: I am waiting for you (Jeg venter på deg), They are waiting for the ambulance (De venter på ambulansen)

  3. You can have a verb after and then you need to use "med": Jeg venter med å rydde til morgen, Jeg kan ikke vente med å snakke med ham.

  4. There are more complicated use cases that I found such as: Middagen venter! (The dinner is ready, it's "waiting"), You can expect ("anticipate") me at 6 (Du kan vente meg klokka seks)

I'm not Norwegian so it would be good to have some confirmation from a native :)


It looks good to me! :)

In the sense of anticipating/expecting it can also be used with a noun after it without a "på", but you're correct in saying that it would require a "på" if the meaning is "to wait".

General/Impersonal statements about anticipation/expectation are often prefaced by "Det ventes...", which could translate to "It's expected to/We're expecting/You can expect.." depending on the context:

"Det ventes regn (/å regne) i morgen."
"It's expected to rain tomorrow."


"Jeg kan ikke vente med å prøve".


why not "difficulties to hear"? It sounds perfect to me!!??


"difficulties to hear" sounds very strange to me as an American Southerner, not sure how it sounds in other dialects of English. "difficulties hearing" would sound alright to me, on the other hand.


Same here in the NW US, and I've never run across this construction in reading many US and British authors.


In English, you can have:

"It is difficult to hear"

"I have difficulty hearing ..."

"*Difficulties to hear" sound kind of like you are listening to difficulties, because 'difficulties' is a noun.


Shouldn't it be "difficulties hearing"? I am not an english native, but "difficulty hearing" sounds very strange to me.


Think you're quite right!


Australian native here: 'Difficulty hearing' is correct from an Aus English/British English standpoint. 'difficulties' sounds quite foreign, and is more difficult to pronounce


What is the difference between "teacher" and "professor"?


in English, a 'teacher' is anyone that teaches, and that includes professors, mentors. Even a teenager that teaches piano every week after school is a 'teacher.' a 'professor' is usually a university-level teacher, maybe someone that holds lectures or seminars. Their role is more academic than, for example, a primary school teacher, and you will often act more formally towards them than other types of 'teachers'


Does one really say:"have difficulty hearing" in English?


Australian here: Yes! It sounds more polite than "I can't hear" or "It's too hard/difficult to hear", and is the proper way to convey that message to, for example, your professor, co-worker, or boss.

To our friends, we would probably just say "I can't hear you," or "I can never hear what you are saying", or something similarly direct.


I understand that this is more polite. But I would be write something like:"...have problems with hearing.....". Or is this completely wrong? For me "difficulty hearing" sound a bit awkward, but maybe because I am Dutch?


"problems (with) hearing" sounds quite normal to me, so there is no issue with using that even in formal situations. For this translation, though, 'vansker' has a direct translation in 'difficulty', so that's why that is chosen here

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