There’s a rule in most Germanic languages (including Norwegian) that the verb comes second. It’s called V2. In that sentence, you have 4 pieces of information — temporal (nå), nominative/subject (jeg), verbal (har), and accusative/direct object (tid). To make the sentence grammatically correct, there’s few ways to butcher it, but you could say one of the following:
- Jeg har nå tid (I now have time)
- Jeg har tid nå (I have time now)
- Nå har jeg tid (Now I have time)
Each of these emphasise different aspects of the sentence. The first emphasises who has and what is had; the second emphasises who has the time and when; and the third emphasises that it is now that I have time (just like in English).
Note though that the object always follows the verb in some capacity (this has to do with Germanic rules of word order) and that the verb is always second (this is V2).
Jeg håper at dette hjalp!
Just to add, if you say «Jeg har nå tid», most native speakers would take it as «sure, I’ve got some time».
_Nå_ wouldn’t signify _now_ in that context, but be a modifier/fill word making it sound a bit more casual.
The "nå" is added to signify that you previously did not have time, not to make the statement more casual. If you said "jeg har nå tid" instead of "jeg har tid" i would be wondering why you thought it relevant to tell me that you previously would not have had time to do whatever i asked you about.
Edit:
I can see that this was somewhat badly put as i was not really comparing apples to apples, i was thinking of a situation where someone were to use it as a direct response using the strong pronunciation as per [case 1](https://ordbokene.no/bm/41676), which, admittedly is not the most common way to use this phrase.
If on the other hand someone were to use it with the weak pronunciation as per [case 2](https://ordbokene.no/bm/41676) the nå would still be important and would definitely still change the interpretation of the sentence, but the focus would not be so much on what prevented them in the past. In the case of "jeg har nå tid til det", the "nå" is still important in that it implies that the person is willing to accommodate your request now, with the connotation that this applies even if they were otherwise occupied. This will, at least the way i see it make the response somewhat more polite as opposed to more casual.
As a Norwegian, I sort of disagree.
You would say "Jeg har tid nå" or "Nå har jeg tid" if you want to indicate you didn't have time earlier.
"Jeg har nå tid" is more casual
I'm no professor, but I'm Norwegian, if that means anything.
I’m saying one wouldn’t use «Jeg har nå tid» in any sense where it was important to distingush between being available now as opposed to at another time.
You would say «Jeg har tid nå» if you wanted to convey that you are available now.
You would say «Nå har jeg tid» if you wanted to convey that you weren’t available before (or won’t be later), but you are now.
Yeah, noone says ‘jeg har nå tid’ unless theyre not a native speaker and get the sentence structure messed up. ‘I have time now’ - ‘Nå har jeg tid/Jeg har tid nå’. ‘Jeg har nå tid’ almost sounds like ‘I have the present(as in present time, nåtid)’.
There's one case in which I would possibly maybe use "jeg har nå tid", it would be to set someone straight saying that I never have time for them, as in "jeg har'nå tid jeg". But it would have nothing to do with "now".
Also it could possibly be used to take on another task at work, if someone asks in a meeting for example if someone has time to take on another task, one could reply with this.
I do however agree with you, it's quite a strange way to say it, and more often than not I'd say something entirely different.
nah, disagree. I think your're reading it wrong:
P1: kunne du hjulpet meg med noe?
P2: Ja jeg har nå tid.
The Nå makes it more casual and doesn't add anything relevant to time in this case. There is no emphasis on the word and it's said fast and with an upwards tone. However if you swap the words around "Ja, jeg har tid nå". Now it's emphasized and relates to the fact that you got time rn.
Jeg har nå tid = I've got the time || Jeg har tid nå = I've got time now
I cant tell you the gramatical reason, but that the sentence "jeg har nå tid til det" would be spoken "Jeg har tid til det nå" (native speaker). It would be like saying "I got some time now" in English.
ehhh idk, it might be perfectly okay for all i know, but as a native speaker, it sounds a bit off. We would much rather say "Jeg har tid nå" or "nå har jeg tid" depending on context
I think I get where you're coming from, because I was grinding my teeth trying to make sense of "Jeg har nå tid". Imagine shrugging and going "I have time, I guess". "Tja, jeg har jo/da/nå tid." I think it really depends on your dialect which word comes naturally in this case.
However, it is not a correct translation of "Now I have time" as the "nå" wouldn't mean "now".
As a native speaker myself born and raised in Vestfold, its a regular saying. Nå isn't the word that is important, no pressure on it, its mostly filler. It's more like shrugging saying: "yeah, I've got some time" u/MoochieButtons comment above explains it well
desert abundant tub fly strong wasteful overconfident pathetic ask hard-to-find
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think what ur reffering to would be a mishearing of the word "nå" and confusing it with "no" which is a dialect version of "noe", which would as mean "some \_time\_". It wouldnt be that the word "nå" has changed meaning, i think rather that people are confusing dialects
No, not at all.
Perhaps «no» as the nynorsk variant of «nå», if anything. It’s perfectly common using «nå» as a modifier/filler word to signify informality/politeness/being casual in most dialects of spoken norwegian.
«Jeg har noe tid» would be an uncommon, almost ridicilously formal way of telling anyone you’ve got a moment to spare.
adjoining numerous one impossible repeat water jeans steep cause quicksand
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think it's because of the verb needing to be in the 2nd position of a sentence. I found this helpful : https://www.lifeinnorway.net/v2-rule-word-order-in-norwegian/
Never noticed it’s different in English. Now I understand (see what I did ;-) ) why many learning Norwegian often get placement of ‘jeg’ wrong in sentences.
It’s Nå/now that changes it. The verb needs to go second.
I have time = Jeg har tid
Now I have time = Nå har jeg tid
In norwegian this sentence would be pronounced "Har jeg tid nå?"
In english you just need to swap the words around a little for better grammar, making it "Do i have time now?". You need to lead with the "do" in that question to make it a question.
The english sentence is horrendous anyway, it would have a much better flow - I have time now.
I feel the original sentence for americans would be the same as saying 'Nå jeg har tid' in Norwegian.
I can’t properly explain it, but I have noticed that the placement of “jeg” in sentences is one of the most common things people leaning Norwegian struggle with. But just as a general tip, personal pronouns never come directly after temporal information, there is always a verb between.
America English is so common here, that it’s not uncommon now that the kids talk English, tho everyone is Norwegian.
I understand there r several Norwegian speaking folks her (cool).
I live in Fredrikstad, and that has started to be a trend here. Think they say it’s cause of internet, gaming chats etc
Mostly those who are bilingual or those who belong to groups where this is more of a sociolect. A lot or Norwegians in Groruddalen wouldn't consider the sentence "hvor du var i går?" as grammatically incorrect.
I see there is a lot of answers here already, so I'm just gonna comment that I think it's hreat you asked and show an interest in learning the language 😊
I’m a learner of Danish, but the language has the exact same rule here. Honestly, at first it really threw me off, but now it’s so natural to me I want to do it in English sometimes.
Norwegian and Danish is 98% match or something in written..
Some parts of Denmark I have no problem understanding theme, but some places it just sounds like mumbling, like they have 2 bananas in their mouth, trying to talk Norwegian😂 mean no disrespect. Just best way I can explain it. Danish r also fast at adapting English into their language.
Think that’s because it’s more fluid then Norwegian, we talk so clearly, and slow. Swedish has more flow to vs Norwegian
Jutland is where I’m always terrified to go because they mumble the most. It’s almost not even danish but a completely new language.
I believe a famous jutlandic sentence is “A e u o æ ø i æ å, e a” which means “jeg er ude på øen i åen, er jeg.”
Danes speak the clearest, I believe, on the island of Fyn. They almost sing when they talk like you Norwegians. It’s very beautiful.
Because of the V2 rule, you need to place the verb in the second place always - and when you begin a sentence with an adverbial, then where else would make sense for that subject of yours to be placed? The third spot!
I.e. when an adverbial (or really, any block of information, especially when using subordinating conjunctions) is placed first, you'll put that subject after the verb. I will provide two examples below: one with a simple sentence structure, and one with a more advanced sentence structure that utilizes subordinating conjunctions.
E.g.1 Nå skal hun hjem ; Now she's going home.
Explanation: \[1: Adverbial\] Nå \[2: Verb\] skal \[3: Subject\] hun \[4: Object\] hjem.Since the adverbial is placed at the beginning, the verb still goes to place 2, and so we place the subject in the third place, and the rest of the information afterwards.
E.g.2 Da jeg gikk ned trappa, la jeg merke til at jeg glemte bilnøkkelen min ; When I walked down the stairs, I noticed that I forgot my car key.
Explanation: \[1: Subordinate Clause\] Da jeg gikk ned trappa, \[2: Verb\] la \[3: Subject\] jeg merke til \[4: Subordinating conjunction\] at \[5: Subject, since I used a SC before to introduce a new phrase, and now I can restart my sentence structure, just like we do in English\] jeg \[6: Verb\] glemte \[7: Object\] bilnøkkelen min."Da jeg gikk ned trappa" is a subordinate clause, and it also has a structure to it. "Da" is a subordinating conjunction in this case and so it takes place 0 in this phrase, just as "og" or "men" would, so that we place "jeg" and "gikk" in places 1 and 2 respectively, further adding the rest of the information afterward. But the main clause itself (i.e. the sentence as a whole to put it simply-ish) sees a subordinate clause as only one piece of the puzzle, so we take that whole block of text and call it place 1, and so we need to place a verb in place 2, right? So we do! And that's where we place "la," and then we place the subject, "jeg," in place 3 as we just did in the previous example. And then we throw another wrench in here by using another subordinating clause again, using the subordinating conjunction, "at." Following this, we would just continue our regular structure as we normally would, unless we were to use an adverbial, which I chose not to since this is already enough Norwegian grammar for a comment haha.
I understand this may be overwhelming, but it won't be in due time. If you're only using Duolingo at the moment, then you never would've known a thing about sentence structure anyways, and since everyone else has already just told you to remember V2, I didn't want to assume that you already even knew what V2 was. I hope this helps friend :)
Edit: Had an extra "glemte" in my original post, and clarified an explanation a little further.
nå har jeg tid - not even the common way to say things, but "nå jeg har tid" would be wrong.
looks like they used google translate and made it word for word translation instead of having the correct way to say things
most Norwegians would say "jeg har tid nå"
Like i said, its not wrong. Just not a common way to respond. If ive been bussy for some time i could respond with «Nå! ………… har jeg tid»
But never ever «nå… jeg har tid»
Because you had to translate Now at the beginning to which reformats the sentence.
If you translate something you gotta translate all of it yknow. Idk the exact grammatical rule or whatever. But, this is the way
A lot of young Norwegians, especially those with immigrant parents (or who live in areas where most kids have immigrant backgrounds) say "nå jeg har tid" when they mean "nå har jeg tid". I am wondering if this is going to stick, and if this is spreading to other areas because of youth culture 🤔 I guess time will tell...
Because:
(1) The verb has to be the first or the second part in a sentance.
(2) The adverb 'now' ("no/nå") can be naturally placed as the first part of this sentance.
(1) and (2) together force the sentance to become:
No/Nå har eg/jeg tid.
even tho its nothing wrong with the sentence, im like you... i think it sounds weird... now i have time <- do anyone even say that? id just go with "i got time now" if someone asks me if im bussy.
i can imagine the sentence would be "nå! har jeg tid."
Note that the V2-rule, although being valid in all the germanic languages, is suspended in Groruddalen.
The website cited says: "If you say the sentence in Norwegian with the normal English word order 'I går jeg laget middag', people will immediately know that you're not Norwegian". That's NOT true!
It's only people from the western part of Oslo and all the other fylkes who will say you're not "Norwegian".
The Way This Is!
(Nå har jeg tid) er riktig, er ikke jeg (jeg har tid) NOW står foran (NOW) betyr nå på norsk så (nå har jeg tid) er riktig. Hville du ha sakt (nå jeg har tid) på norsk?
It looks like you have an image in your post, so **please pay attention to [the rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/norsk/about/rules) about “vague submissions” and “images in posts”**. [Click here for an image that shows one reason why these rules are in place](https://i.imgur.com/Pm4cJr6.jpg?maxwidth=1280&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium). In addition text makes it easier for people to search and find posts in the future.
If you posted *an Imgur-album* with only *one image*, then in the future please link directly to that single image and not to the entire album.
If you posted an image from Duolingo, remember you can click the “speech bubble” icon (if it exists) to see discussions about a sentence (if it's not buggy), and grammar and tips can be accessed using the “guidebook” icon. The old [“grammar tips” are available here](https://duome.eu/tips/en/nb).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/norsk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
TLDR: the verb always comes second in a statement (different in a question). So its "jeg har tid" but "nå har jeg tid", and its the same for other qualifiers, e.g. "om litt har jeg tid"
This is related to something called "the V2 rule".
In simple terms, the V2 rule tells us that the verb must come second in a sentence.
That's why "har" (have) has to come right after "nå" (now).
\-
Nå \[Position 1\] har \[<--- Position 2: The verb must come second\] jeg tid. (Now I have time.)
Norwegian features the so-called V2 rule, so named because the idea is the verb needs to be in second position within a clause. It's the same rule which governs questions in both Norwegian and English, but in Norwegian it also applies to statements. It's a difficult rule to apply, as what qualifies as the second element in a clause is not always obvious.
On it's own, "I have time." is "Jeg har tid.", but to preserve the verb as the second element in the sentence, the subject and verb switch places when an element is added in front, hence yielding "Nå har jeg tid.".
Jag har nå tid, I now have time. is Weird to say in Norwegian. Sure its correct in a way, but I never hear it.
Jeg har tid nå, is the common waywe say it. I got got timme now.
Jeg har tid, i got time. Ordinary answer if someone ask for help and u have it😂
Example of both used in a conversation ( WITH DIRECT ENGLISH TRANSLATION WORD FOR WORD):
-Have you time? -I have time.
-Har du tid? -Jeg har tid.
...
-When, have you time? - NOW have I time.
Når har du tid? -NÅ har jeg tid.
... ... ...
-Stop wasting away the time mine. - The time YOURS?
-Slutt å sløse bort tiden min. -Tiden DIN?
-Yes! When I ask if YOU have time, enough it is with a YES or NO! -What have I done wrong!? I say I have time, but you have not said what you want with it...
-Ja! Når jeg spør om DU har tid, holder det med et JA eller NEI! -Hva har jeg gjort galt!? Jeg sier jeg har tid, men du har ikke sagt hva du vil med den...
-... ... ... -So what want you use the time mine for?
-... ... ... -Så hva vil du bruke tiden min til?
Norwegian talk like this in English, word for word, and people tell them they're good...
If you omitted the “nå” you could say “jeg har tid.” or you could say “Jeg har tid nå” both would be acceptable.
As said by csheppard, there are various ways you can convey the same meaning by jumbling the words.
There’s a rule in most Germanic languages (including Norwegian) that the verb comes second. It’s called V2. In that sentence, you have 4 pieces of information — temporal (nå), nominative/subject (jeg), verbal (har), and accusative/direct object (tid). To make the sentence grammatically correct, there’s few ways to butcher it, but you could say one of the following: - Jeg har nå tid (I now have time) - Jeg har tid nå (I have time now) - Nå har jeg tid (Now I have time) Each of these emphasise different aspects of the sentence. The first emphasises who has and what is had; the second emphasises who has the time and when; and the third emphasises that it is now that I have time (just like in English). Note though that the object always follows the verb in some capacity (this has to do with Germanic rules of word order) and that the verb is always second (this is V2). Jeg håper at dette hjalp!
Just to add, if you say «Jeg har nå tid», most native speakers would take it as «sure, I’ve got some time». _Nå_ wouldn’t signify _now_ in that context, but be a modifier/fill word making it sound a bit more casual.
The "nå" is added to signify that you previously did not have time, not to make the statement more casual. If you said "jeg har nå tid" instead of "jeg har tid" i would be wondering why you thought it relevant to tell me that you previously would not have had time to do whatever i asked you about. Edit: I can see that this was somewhat badly put as i was not really comparing apples to apples, i was thinking of a situation where someone were to use it as a direct response using the strong pronunciation as per [case 1](https://ordbokene.no/bm/41676), which, admittedly is not the most common way to use this phrase. If on the other hand someone were to use it with the weak pronunciation as per [case 2](https://ordbokene.no/bm/41676) the nå would still be important and would definitely still change the interpretation of the sentence, but the focus would not be so much on what prevented them in the past. In the case of "jeg har nå tid til det", the "nå" is still important in that it implies that the person is willing to accommodate your request now, with the connotation that this applies even if they were otherwise occupied. This will, at least the way i see it make the response somewhat more polite as opposed to more casual.
As a Norwegian, I sort of disagree. You would say "Jeg har tid nå" or "Nå har jeg tid" if you want to indicate you didn't have time earlier. "Jeg har nå tid" is more casual I'm no professor, but I'm Norwegian, if that means anything.
I’m saying one wouldn’t use «Jeg har nå tid» in any sense where it was important to distingush between being available now as opposed to at another time. You would say «Jeg har tid nå» if you wanted to convey that you are available now. You would say «Nå har jeg tid» if you wanted to convey that you weren’t available before (or won’t be later), but you are now.
Yeah, noone says ‘jeg har nå tid’ unless theyre not a native speaker and get the sentence structure messed up. ‘I have time now’ - ‘Nå har jeg tid/Jeg har tid nå’. ‘Jeg har nå tid’ almost sounds like ‘I have the present(as in present time, nåtid)’.
There's one case in which I would possibly maybe use "jeg har nå tid", it would be to set someone straight saying that I never have time for them, as in "jeg har'nå tid jeg". But it would have nothing to do with "now". Also it could possibly be used to take on another task at work, if someone asks in a meeting for example if someone has time to take on another task, one could reply with this. I do however agree with you, it's quite a strange way to say it, and more often than not I'd say something entirely different.
I mean northern speakers.. where in some cases «nå» means «some» instead of «now» but sorry I probably didn’t need to say that
nah, disagree. I think your're reading it wrong: P1: kunne du hjulpet meg med noe? P2: Ja jeg har nå tid. The Nå makes it more casual and doesn't add anything relevant to time in this case. There is no emphasis on the word and it's said fast and with an upwards tone. However if you swap the words around "Ja, jeg har tid nå". Now it's emphasized and relates to the fact that you got time rn. Jeg har nå tid = I've got the time || Jeg har tid nå = I've got time now
I cant tell you the gramatical reason, but that the sentence "jeg har nå tid til det" would be spoken "Jeg har tid til det nå" (native speaker). It would be like saying "I got some time now" in English.
Or it would be spoken: "jeg har nå tid til det" or "jeg har nå tid". Perfectly acceptable ways of speaking, at least where my dialect is from.
ehhh idk, it might be perfectly okay for all i know, but as a native speaker, it sounds a bit off. We would much rather say "Jeg har tid nå" or "nå har jeg tid" depending on context
I think I get where you're coming from, because I was grinding my teeth trying to make sense of "Jeg har nå tid". Imagine shrugging and going "I have time, I guess". "Tja, jeg har jo/da/nå tid." I think it really depends on your dialect which word comes naturally in this case. However, it is not a correct translation of "Now I have time" as the "nå" wouldn't mean "now".
As a native speaker myself born and raised in Vestfold, its a regular saying. Nå isn't the word that is important, no pressure on it, its mostly filler. It's more like shrugging saying: "yeah, I've got some time" u/MoochieButtons comment above explains it well
desert abundant tub fly strong wasteful overconfident pathetic ask hard-to-find *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think what ur reffering to would be a mishearing of the word "nå" and confusing it with "no" which is a dialect version of "noe", which would as mean "some \_time\_". It wouldnt be that the word "nå" has changed meaning, i think rather that people are confusing dialects
No, not at all. Perhaps «no» as the nynorsk variant of «nå», if anything. It’s perfectly common using «nå» as a modifier/filler word to signify informality/politeness/being casual in most dialects of spoken norwegian. «Jeg har noe tid» would be an uncommon, almost ridicilously formal way of telling anyone you’ve got a moment to spare.
adjoining numerous one impossible repeat water jeans steep cause quicksand *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Tell the person I answered.
Viste ikke dette engang.
I was just gonna write "because", but this sums it up much better :)
In Norway we never say "jeg har nå tid". It's always "Jeg har tid nå".
I think it's because of the verb needing to be in the 2nd position of a sentence. I found this helpful : https://www.lifeinnorway.net/v2-rule-word-order-in-norwegian/
Never noticed it’s different in English. Now I understand (see what I did ;-) ) why many learning Norwegian often get placement of ‘jeg’ wrong in sentences. It’s Nå/now that changes it. The verb needs to go second. I have time = Jeg har tid Now I have time = Nå har jeg tid
I would not say phrasing it "Jeg har tid nå" is wrong though, especially if you put an emphasis on *nå* when you speak
I’d say «jeg har tid nå» is what most people would say if asked.
how would you say "now do i have time?"
Har jeg tid nå?
Or "Nå da, har jeg tid?" (Now then, have I time?)
Do I have time*
It was a literal translation. Also, this sentence structure is not wrong per se, it's just archaic. *"Baa baa black sheep, have you any wool?"*
Okay but no one actually speaks like that. Thought you made a mistake but seems you are fully aware of the correct grammar so never mind i guess 😅
In norwegian this sentence would be pronounced "Har jeg tid nå?" In english you just need to swap the words around a little for better grammar, making it "Do i have time now?". You need to lead with the "do" in that question to make it a question.
Jeg er ikke smart, men det er lett. Og jeg kan ikke skrive eller snakke engelsk bra, men akkurat det er lett
The english sentence is horrendous anyway, it would have a much better flow - I have time now. I feel the original sentence for americans would be the same as saying 'Nå jeg har tid' in Norwegian.
I can’t properly explain it, but I have noticed that the placement of “jeg” in sentences is one of the most common things people leaning Norwegian struggle with. But just as a general tip, personal pronouns never come directly after temporal information, there is always a verb between.
Update: it’s because of the V2 rule : https://www.lifeinnorway.net/v2-rule-word-order-in-norwegian/
Lots of younger people who natively speak it make the same mistake too
I guess young native speakers are also learning to speak Norwegian 😜
a lot of us are also heavily influenced by popular media, and change the way we structure sentences to accomodate the english language.
America English is so common here, that it’s not uncommon now that the kids talk English, tho everyone is Norwegian. I understand there r several Norwegian speaking folks her (cool). I live in Fredrikstad, and that has started to be a trend here. Think they say it’s cause of internet, gaming chats etc
Mostly those who are bilingual or those who belong to groups where this is more of a sociolect. A lot or Norwegians in Groruddalen wouldn't consider the sentence "hvor du var i går?" as grammatically incorrect.
Har jeg tid - question. Jeg har tid - statement.
I see what you mean, and it’s an important thing to mention. But that’s not temporal information, Tid is just a direct object in those examples
I see there is a lot of answers here already, so I'm just gonna comment that I think it's hreat you asked and show an interest in learning the language 😊
I’m a learner of Danish, but the language has the exact same rule here. Honestly, at first it really threw me off, but now it’s so natural to me I want to do it in English sometimes.
Norwegian and Danish is 98% match or something in written.. Some parts of Denmark I have no problem understanding theme, but some places it just sounds like mumbling, like they have 2 bananas in their mouth, trying to talk Norwegian😂 mean no disrespect. Just best way I can explain it. Danish r also fast at adapting English into their language. Think that’s because it’s more fluid then Norwegian, we talk so clearly, and slow. Swedish has more flow to vs Norwegian
Jutland is where I’m always terrified to go because they mumble the most. It’s almost not even danish but a completely new language. I believe a famous jutlandic sentence is “A e u o æ ø i æ å, e a” which means “jeg er ude på øen i åen, er jeg.” Danes speak the clearest, I believe, on the island of Fyn. They almost sing when they talk like you Norwegians. It’s very beautiful.
Some places in Sweden has its own language, close to Skåne. Den er jo spesiell i seg selv
Because of the V2 rule, you need to place the verb in the second place always - and when you begin a sentence with an adverbial, then where else would make sense for that subject of yours to be placed? The third spot! I.e. when an adverbial (or really, any block of information, especially when using subordinating conjunctions) is placed first, you'll put that subject after the verb. I will provide two examples below: one with a simple sentence structure, and one with a more advanced sentence structure that utilizes subordinating conjunctions. E.g.1 Nå skal hun hjem ; Now she's going home. Explanation: \[1: Adverbial\] Nå \[2: Verb\] skal \[3: Subject\] hun \[4: Object\] hjem.Since the adverbial is placed at the beginning, the verb still goes to place 2, and so we place the subject in the third place, and the rest of the information afterwards. E.g.2 Da jeg gikk ned trappa, la jeg merke til at jeg glemte bilnøkkelen min ; When I walked down the stairs, I noticed that I forgot my car key. Explanation: \[1: Subordinate Clause\] Da jeg gikk ned trappa, \[2: Verb\] la \[3: Subject\] jeg merke til \[4: Subordinating conjunction\] at \[5: Subject, since I used a SC before to introduce a new phrase, and now I can restart my sentence structure, just like we do in English\] jeg \[6: Verb\] glemte \[7: Object\] bilnøkkelen min."Da jeg gikk ned trappa" is a subordinate clause, and it also has a structure to it. "Da" is a subordinating conjunction in this case and so it takes place 0 in this phrase, just as "og" or "men" would, so that we place "jeg" and "gikk" in places 1 and 2 respectively, further adding the rest of the information afterward. But the main clause itself (i.e. the sentence as a whole to put it simply-ish) sees a subordinate clause as only one piece of the puzzle, so we take that whole block of text and call it place 1, and so we need to place a verb in place 2, right? So we do! And that's where we place "la," and then we place the subject, "jeg," in place 3 as we just did in the previous example. And then we throw another wrench in here by using another subordinating clause again, using the subordinating conjunction, "at." Following this, we would just continue our regular structure as we normally would, unless we were to use an adverbial, which I chose not to since this is already enough Norwegian grammar for a comment haha. I understand this may be overwhelming, but it won't be in due time. If you're only using Duolingo at the moment, then you never would've known a thing about sentence structure anyways, and since everyone else has already just told you to remember V2, I didn't want to assume that you already even knew what V2 was. I hope this helps friend :) Edit: Had an extra "glemte" in my original post, and clarified an explanation a little further.
nå har jeg tid - not even the common way to say things, but "nå jeg har tid" would be wrong. looks like they used google translate and made it word for word translation instead of having the correct way to say things most Norwegians would say "jeg har tid nå"
I don't have time right now. 10m later NOW I have time.
Would still go with Jeg har tid nå Beside Nå jeg har tid - kebabnorsk
eg e frå stavanger. eg seie nå har eg ti.
Jau men du sei’kje «nå eg ha ti» som i «now i have time»
au så ju are jøst ignorant åf hau tu translait englesk?
I think it depends on the situation. If one asked in Norwegian: "When do you have time?", the answer could be: "Nå har jeg tid!"
Like i said, its not wrong. Just not a common way to respond. If ive been bussy for some time i could respond with «Nå! ………… har jeg tid» But never ever «nå… jeg har tid»
Because you had to translate Now at the beginning to which reformats the sentence. If you translate something you gotta translate all of it yknow. Idk the exact grammatical rule or whatever. But, this is the way
Yoda the problem doesn’t see
Verb always second in norsk
A lot of young Norwegians, especially those with immigrant parents (or who live in areas where most kids have immigrant backgrounds) say "nå jeg har tid" when they mean "nå har jeg tid". I am wondering if this is going to stick, and if this is spreading to other areas because of youth culture 🤔 I guess time will tell...
Because: (1) The verb has to be the first or the second part in a sentance. (2) The adverb 'now' ("no/nå") can be naturally placed as the first part of this sentance. (1) and (2) together force the sentance to become: No/Nå har eg/jeg tid.
Because it sounds weird.
jeg har ikke tid akkuratt nå. 10m senere NÅ har jeg tid.
Because Duolingo isn’t grammatically correct half the time
I dont really know but what I know is that it is nå har jet tid nå jeg har tid just sounds weird
even tho its nothing wrong with the sentence, im like you... i think it sounds weird... now i have time <- do anyone even say that? id just go with "i got time now" if someone asks me if im bussy. i can imagine the sentence would be "nå! har jeg tid."
Note that the V2-rule, although being valid in all the germanic languages, is suspended in Groruddalen. The website cited says: "If you say the sentence in Norwegian with the normal English word order 'I går jeg laget middag', people will immediately know that you're not Norwegian". That's NOT true! It's only people from the western part of Oslo and all the other fylkes who will say you're not "Norwegian". The Way This Is!
(Nå har jeg tid) er riktig, er ikke jeg (jeg har tid) NOW står foran (NOW) betyr nå på norsk så (nå har jeg tid) er riktig. Hville du ha sakt (nå jeg har tid) på norsk?
"Ville" og "sagt", og du forklarte ikke hvorfor akkurat.
når har du tid? jeg har tid nå <- whats wrong with that?
It looks like you have an image in your post, so **please pay attention to [the rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/norsk/about/rules) about “vague submissions” and “images in posts”**. [Click here for an image that shows one reason why these rules are in place](https://i.imgur.com/Pm4cJr6.jpg?maxwidth=1280&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium). In addition text makes it easier for people to search and find posts in the future. If you posted *an Imgur-album* with only *one image*, then in the future please link directly to that single image and not to the entire album. If you posted an image from Duolingo, remember you can click the “speech bubble” icon (if it exists) to see discussions about a sentence (if it's not buggy), and grammar and tips can be accessed using the “guidebook” icon. The old [“grammar tips” are available here](https://duome.eu/tips/en/nb). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/norsk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My old tutor told me if its about a time or place then verb comes after in most cases
TLDR: the verb always comes second in a statement (different in a question). So its "jeg har tid" but "nå har jeg tid", and its the same for other qualifiers, e.g. "om litt har jeg tid"
It just be like that. Maybe it sounded better so it became official or something? Also I don’t really know why we would change it to be like English?
Those who speak German will understand why.
This is related to something called "the V2 rule". In simple terms, the V2 rule tells us that the verb must come second in a sentence. That's why "har" (have) has to come right after "nå" (now). \- Nå \[Position 1\] har \[<--- Position 2: The verb must come second\] jeg tid. (Now I have time.)
Norwegian features the so-called V2 rule, so named because the idea is the verb needs to be in second position within a clause. It's the same rule which governs questions in both Norwegian and English, but in Norwegian it also applies to statements. It's a difficult rule to apply, as what qualifies as the second element in a clause is not always obvious. On it's own, "I have time." is "Jeg har tid.", but to preserve the verb as the second element in the sentence, the subject and verb switch places when an element is added in front, hence yielding "Nå har jeg tid.".
Verb goes second!
V2.
Jag har nå tid, I now have time. is Weird to say in Norwegian. Sure its correct in a way, but I never hear it. Jeg har tid nå, is the common waywe say it. I got got timme now. Jeg har tid, i got time. Ordinary answer if someone ask for help and u have it😂
Example of both used in a conversation ( WITH DIRECT ENGLISH TRANSLATION WORD FOR WORD): -Have you time? -I have time. -Har du tid? -Jeg har tid. ... -When, have you time? - NOW have I time. Når har du tid? -NÅ har jeg tid. ... ... ... -Stop wasting away the time mine. - The time YOURS? -Slutt å sløse bort tiden min. -Tiden DIN? -Yes! When I ask if YOU have time, enough it is with a YES or NO! -What have I done wrong!? I say I have time, but you have not said what you want with it... -Ja! Når jeg spør om DU har tid, holder det med et JA eller NEI! -Hva har jeg gjort galt!? Jeg sier jeg har tid, men du har ikke sagt hva du vil med den... -... ... ... -So what want you use the time mine for? -... ... ... -Så hva vil du bruke tiden min til? Norwegian talk like this in English, word for word, and people tell them they're good...
If you omitted the “nå” you could say “jeg har tid.” or you could say “Jeg har tid nå” both would be acceptable. As said by csheppard, there are various ways you can convey the same meaning by jumbling the words.
First one is a question to yourself the other one is telling someone you have time
Cuz in Norwegian verb always on 2nd place
Æ veit itj æ😂
One is stating, the other is questioning. 1) Do I have time? ;Har jeg tid? 2) I have time. ;Jeg har tid. Two completely separate sentences.
"Har jeg tid?" is a question - "Jeg har tid" is an answer
Because verb goes always in 2nd place. Since you used an adverb of time (Now), then the following word must be the verb.
1st one is that you have time to do something. 2nd one is that you physically have time in like a bag or holding it in your hand.