To say that something exists — there's milk in the fridge, there are lots of options — or to bring a brand-new person or thing on stage — a man came, some guests showed up — Icelandic uses a single family of constructions built on the dummy það. They look simple, but they hide a rule English speakers almost never notice in their own language: you can only do this with an indefinite noun. Say there's a cat and Icelandic is happy; try to say there's the cat and the whole construction breaks. This page is about that family — existentials and presentationals — and the definiteness restriction that governs both.
(This page assumes you already know how the dummy það fills the first slot and vanishes when something fronts — that machinery is on its own page, syntax/dummy-thad. Here we focus on what the constructions mean, which nouns they accept, and how the verb agrees.)
Existentials: það + vera + indefinite noun
The existential states that something is present somewhere. The frame is fixed: það + a form of vera ("to be") + an indefinite noun phrase, usually followed by a location.
Það er mjólk í ísskápnum.
There's milk in the fridge. (það + er + indefinite mjólk + location)
Það er enginn heima — reyndu aftur seinna.
There's nobody home — try again later. (existential með enginn)
Það er pláss fyrir okkur öll í bílnum.
There's room for all of us in the car.
The English template "there is / there are" maps onto this almost one-to-one, with one difference that matters enormously: in English, there never changes and is/are is the only thing that agrees. In Icelandic, það is likewise frozen, but you must actively choose between er (singular) and eru (plural), and you must get it right.
það er (sg.) vs það eru (pl.): agree with the notional subject
The dummy það is grammatically neuter singular, and an English speaker's instinct is to leave the verb singular to match it. That instinct is wrong. The verb agrees with the real noun — the notional subject that follows — exactly as it would if that noun were the grammatical subject. Plural noun, plural verb.
| Sentence | Notional subject | Verb |
|---|---|---|
| Það er mjólk í ísskápnum. | mjólk (sg.) | er |
| Það eru margir möguleikar. | margir möguleikar (pl.) | eru |
| Það voru tvær konur í biðstofunni. | tvær konur (pl.) | voru |
Það eru margir möguleikar í stöðunni.
There are lots of options in this situation. (plural möguleikar → plural eru)
Það voru engin laus borð, svo við biðum.
There were no free tables, so we waited. (plural engin borð → plural voru)
Casual English lets you say "there's lots of options," which is exactly the bad habit that produces Það er margir möguleikar in Icelandic. In Icelandic the plural is not optional in the standard language: it is Það *eru margir*, full stop.
The definiteness restriction: why *Það er kötturinn is odd
Here is the rule that has no obvious English analogue, because English mostly enforces it silently. The noun introduced by an existential (or presentational) must be indefinite. You can say there's a cat but not, in this construction, *there's the cat. Icelandic enforces the same restriction, and it is sharper and more audible because Icelandic marks definiteness with a suffixed article.
Það er köttur í garðinum.
There's a cat in the garden. (indefinite köttur — fully natural)
Það er maður fyrir utan að bíða.
There's a man waiting outside. (indefinite maður)
Now make the noun definite — kötturinn ("the cat"), maðurinn ("the man") — and the existential collapses:
❌ Það er kötturinn í garðinum.
Odd — you can't introduce a DEFINITE noun (kötturinn 'the cat') with an existential.
✅ Kötturinn er í garðinum.
The cat is in the garden. (definite noun → ordinary subject-first sentence)
The fix is not to repair the existential but to abandon it: a definite noun is, by definition, already known to the listener, so there is nothing to introduce. You simply make it the ordinary subject and front it. This is the deep logic worth internalising:
Compare the minimal pair directly. Það er maður úti answers "what's out there?" by introducing a man the listener didn't know about. Maðurinn er hér answers "where's the man?" by locating a man already under discussion. Different jobs, different syntax.
Það er maður úti sem vill tala við þig.
There's a man outside who wants to talk to you. (introducing a new, unknown man)
Maðurinn er hér — hann beið inni.
The man is here — he waited inside. (locating a known man; noun-first)
There is a genuine exception worth naming honestly: a list reading. When you enumerate ("Who's coming? Well, there's Anna, there's Jón…"), a definite or even a name can follow það er, because you are running through items on a list, not asserting bare existence. That is a separate, listing use; in the plain existential of pure existence, the definiteness restriction holds firmly.
Presentationals: það + an intransitive verb
The existential uses vera. The closely related presentational uses an intransitive verb of appearance, arrival, or happening — koma ("come"), vanta ("be lacking"), gerast ("happen"), vera til ("exist") — to stage a new participant. The frame is það + verb + indefinite subject.
Það kom maður og spurði um þig.
A man came and asked about you. (presentational — það + kom + indefinite maður)
Það komu gestir í gærkvöldi.
Some guests came last night. (plural gestir → plural komu)
Það gerðist eitthvað skrýtið á fundinum.
Something strange happened at the meeting.
Notice the agreement again: Það *kom maður (one man, singular verb) versus Það komu gestir (several guests, plural verb). The verb tracks the real subject, never það*.
A high-frequency presentational uses vanta ("to be lacking / needed"). This verb takes its experiencer (if any) in the accusative and its lacked thing also in the accusative, and it is overwhelmingly used in this það-frame:
Það vantar mjólk — geturðu keypt í leiðinni?
We're out of milk — can you buy some on the way? (Það vantar X = 'X is lacking')
Það vantaði tvo stóla, svo við sóttum þá fram.
Two chairs were missing, so we fetched them. (vantaði + accusative tvo stóla)
það vanishes when something else fronts
Both constructions inherit the headline behaviour of the dummy það: it only fills an otherwise-empty first slot. Front a location or a time phrase, and það disappears, because the slot is now taken (this is the V2 rule; see syntax/v2-word-order).
Í ísskápnum er mjólk.
In the fridge there's milk. (location fronted → no það; er is now second)
Í gærkvöldi komu gestir.
Last night some guests came. (time fronted → no það; komu second)
Compare English, which stubbornly keeps "there" no matter what is fronted: "In the fridge there is milk." Icelandic cannot do that — \Í ísskápnum það er mjólk* would put two constituents before the verb, which V2 forbids.
English vs Icelandic, summarised
English has there is / there are; Icelandic has það er / það eru. The three differences that trip learners:
- Agreement is live. English "there's" hides number in casual speech; Icelandic forces er vs eru and the plural is obligatory.
- The definiteness restriction is audible. English mostly hides it; Icelandic, with its suffixed article, makes \Það er kötturinn* sound wrong, and the repair is to switch to noun-first order, not to patch the existential.
- það is mobile, there is not. Front a phrase and það drops; there never does.
Common Mistakes
❌ Það er bíllinn fyrir utan.
Definiteness violation — you can't introduce 'the car' (definite) with an existential.
✅ Bíllinn er fyrir utan. / Það er bíll fyrir utan.
The car's outside. / There's a car outside. (definite → noun-first; or keep it indefinite)
A definite noun is already known, so there's nothing to introduce. Either front it as an ordinary subject (Bíllinn er…) or, if you really mean "a car," keep it indefinite (Það er bíll…).
❌ Það er margir möguleikar.
Agreement error — margir möguleikar is plural, so the verb must be eru.
✅ Það eru margir möguleikar.
There are lots of options. (plural notional subject → eru)
The verb agrees with the real noun, not with the singular-looking það. Plural noun, plural verb — always.
❌ Það komu maður seint um kvöldið.
Agreement error — one man is singular: kom, not the plural komu.
✅ Það kom maður seint um kvöldið.
A man came late in the evening. (singular maður → kom)
In presentationals too, agree with the indefinite subject. Maður (singular) → kom; menn (plural) → komu.
❌ Í ísskápnum það er mjólk.
V2 violation — once 'in the fridge' fronts, the það must go.
✅ Í ísskápnum er mjólk.
In the fridge there's milk. (fronted location → no það)
Unlike English "there," the dummy það disappears the moment another phrase takes first position.
❌ Það vantar mjólkina.
Definiteness clash — the presentational vantar wants an indefinite noun: mjólk, not mjólkina.
✅ Það vantar mjólk.
We're out of milk. (indefinite mjólk; 'we're missing THE milk' would need a different framing)
Það vantar X introduces a lack of some X; the introduced noun stays indefinite, just like every other noun in this family.
Key Takeaways
- Existentials state presence: það + vera (er/eru) + indefinite noun — Það er mjólk, Það eru margir möguleikar.
- Presentationals stage a new participant with an intransitive verb: Það kom maður, Það komu gestir, Það vantar mjólk.
- The verb agrees with the notional subject, never with the singular það: er vs eru, kom vs komu.
- Definiteness restriction: the introduced noun must be indefinite. A definite noun is already known, so you switch to noun-first order — Kötturinn er hér, not \Það er kötturinn*.
- Like all dummy það, it vanishes when a location or time phrase fronts: Í ísskápnum er mjólk.
Now practice Icelandic
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Icelandic→Related Topics
- The Dummy Subject það (Expletive)A2 — The expletive það that fills the obligatory first slot when nothing else is fronted — weather (það rignir), existentials (það er köttur í garðinum), and presentationals (það kom maður) — and how it vanishes the moment any other phrase takes first position, while the verb agrees with the real subject.
- Definite vs Indefinite: There Is No 'a/an'A1 — Icelandic has a suffixed definite article but no indefinite article at all — a bare noun is already indefinite, so 'maður' is both 'man' and 'a man', and English 'a/an' is simply never translated.
- V2: The Verb-Second RuleA2 — The foundational rule of Icelandic main clauses — the finite verb is always the SECOND constituent, so fronting anything other than the subject forces verb-subject inversion (Í dag fer ég, Þetta veit ég ekki), unlike English which keeps the subject first.
- vanta (to lack / need)A2 — The impersonal double-accusative verb vanta (mig vantar / mig vantaði): both the experiencer AND the thing lacked are in the ACCUSATIVE, the verb stays frozen at 3sg vantar, the þágufallssýki 'mér vantar' dialectal error, and the contrast with þurfa 'need to do'.
- Definiteness Effects and SpecificityC1 — A single semantic notion — is the referent new/non-specific, or already-established/specific? — surfaces as two different syntactic phenomena. In existentials and the transitive-expletive construction it produces the definiteness restriction (Það er köttur í garðinum, never *Það er kötturinn). In relative clauses it controls mood: a NON-specific antecedent licenses the subjunctive (sem kunni), a specific one takes the indicative (sem kann). Unifying these two phenomena under one notion is the C1 insight that competitors keep apart.