They relate to grammatical genders. "Mi" relates to nouns which are feminine, "min relates to masculine, and "mitt" to neuter, all meaning "my" or "mine" in English.. The same applies for the version of your(s). "Ditt barn" because "barn" is neuter. "Din gutt" because "gutt" is masculine. "Di ku" (your cow), because "ku" is feminine. It should be noted that most feminine nouns can be treated as masculine ones these days, creating a "common gender" which simplifies things, so "din" can often be used instead, along with using the definite article suffixes (or word endings) as masculine instead of feminine. Same goes for using "min" with nouns which have the feminine grammatical gender. However, you must ensure to use the correct definite article suffix. You could equally say "kuen din" or "kua di". Just make sure the suffix matches the version of your(s) or my/mine.
The more you get into reading the language, the more you will notice this and start to pick it up. Try not to change too many feminine nouns into masculine ones though, there are many like "jente" which would sound odd using the masculine form,
When you get into reading Norwegian you will begin to notice and assimilate these patterns more naturally.
Just keep an eye out; make notes about the grammar and practice a bit with these lessons but don't get too flustered if it doesn't stick at first. When you get into reading the language you will begin to notice and assimilate these kind of patterns.
No, nither. Both sentences mean exactly same thing. The problematic word is " et barn" in the first sentence "barn" is not define, and in second it is. When the noun isn't defined all the min, mi, mitt, di, din, ditt etc. goes before the noun (mi ku, min kopp, mitt egg), and when the noun is defined all those mins, mis and mitts goes after the noun (kua mi, koppen min, egget mitt). It is just a gramatical construction.
By "un/defined" do you mean the difference between a definite and an indefinite article? Or do you mean the lack or inclusion of an article? Min kopp does not include any variation on en, et or whatnot, but koppen min does. So would I say "en kopp min" or "en min kopp"? Or am I completely misunderstanding you?
Sorry, I am not a native English speaker, so I am sorry for the inconvenience. Nevertheless I think that "mi", "min", "mitt" etc. include allready "ei", "en" and "et" so it is useless to repeat it. There is no need to say "en min kopp". Even more "en kopp min" and " en min kopp" are grammatical errors. In the other words when it commes to the indefinite form of the noun "mi", "min" "mitt" etc. not only mean the English equivalent of "my", "mine" etc. but also includes indication of the grammatical gender of the noun.
To be honest I've allways thought about it like that: I that case EN isn't that important, it is just showing me the grammatical gender of the noun (some Norwegians aren't even using it, they are a bitt slappy when it commes to grammar). The form of the noun is what I am looking for. If it is "kopp", "ku" or "egg" I know that it is indefinite. So I have to put "mi", "min", "mitt" etc. before the noun. If there is written "koppen", "kua" or "egget" I know that this is definite form of the noun, so I have to put "mi", "min" "mitt" after the noun.
"Mi", "min", "mitt" etc. have to be consistent with the grammatical gender of the noun wether the noun is in it's definite form or not.
Thank you. We don't have articles in Russian, that is why it is complicated a little bit. Here comes another issue:
what is the difference between "mitt barn" and "barnet mitt" - "a my child" and "the my child"?
"Any of my children, one of them" versus "this very child of mine" ?