Words like derfor ("therefore"), likevel ("nevertheless") and dessuten ("besides") connect one sentence to the next, so English calls them conjunctive adverbs and treats them loosely like little conjunctions. In Norwegian the distinction is sharper and it controls your word order: these words are adverbs, not conjunctions, and that single fact means that when you put one at the front of a clause, the verb must come before the subject — V2 inversion. Han var syk. *Derfor ble han hjemme* ("He was ill. Therefore he stayed home"). Get this wrong and the sentence is not just stylistically off; it is ungrammatical. This page gives you the inventory and a clean test for telling adverbs from real conjunctions.
The core fact: they are adverbs, so they count for V2
Norwegian is a V2 language: in a main clause the finite verb sits in the second position, and exactly one constituent precedes it. If you front anything other than the subject — a time word, an object, or an adverb — the subject is pushed to after the verb. A conjunctional adverb is a full constituent occupying that first slot, so the subject inverts.
Han var syk. Derfor ble han hjemme.
He was ill. Therefore he stayed home.
Det regnet hele dagen. Likevel gikk vi tur.
It rained all day. Nevertheless we went for a walk.
Bussen var full. Dessuten var den forsinket.
The bus was packed. Besides, it was late.
In each, the fronted adverb is followed immediately by the verb: Derfor *ble han, Likevel **gikk vi, Dessuten **var den. The subject (*han, vi, den) comes after the verb. This is the heart of the page.
Contrast: the conjunctions og, men, for do NOT invert
The true coordinating conjunctions — og (and), men (but), for (for/because), eller (or), så (so) — are not constituents inside the clause; they are glue between two clauses. They sit in a "zeroth" position that doesn't count for V2, so the clause after them keeps its normal subject–verb order.
Han ble hjemme, for han var syk.
He stayed home, for he was ill.
Det regnet hele dagen, men vi gikk tur likevel.
It rained all day, but we went for a walk anyway.
Compare directly: Derfor *ble han hjemme (adverb → inversion) versus …for han var syk* (conjunction → no inversion). Same idea of cause, opposite word order, because one word is an adverb and the other is a conjunction. English flattens this — "therefore", "so" and "for" all just sit in front and the subject never moves — which is exactly why English speakers forget to invert.
The diagnostic test
You do not need to memorise which words are which — there is a clean test:
- Put the linker first in the clause. Does the verb come before the subject? → it is an adverb (Derfor dro vi, Likevel kom han).
- Can the linker be moved into the middle of the clause, after the verb? → only adverbs can (Vi dro derfor). Conjunctions are stuck between the clauses.
- Does the clause keep subject–verb order right after the linker? → it is a conjunction (…men vi dro, …for han kom).
Vi dro derfor uten henne.
We therefore left without her. (adverb sitting mid-field)
Han hadde imidlertid glemt nøklene.
He had, however, forgotten the keys. (adverb mid-field)
That mid-field freedom is the giveaway: you can say Vi dro derfor and Han hadde imidlertid glemt, but you can never say Vi dro men or Han hadde for glemt — the conjunctions cannot float into the clause. Adverbs are flexible constituents; conjunctions are fixed links.
The inventory
These are the conjunctional adverbs you will meet most. All trigger inversion when fronted and may sit mid-field; their register is neutral unless marked.
| Adverb | English | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| derfor | therefore, so | cause → result |
| dermed | thereby, thus, and so | consequence |
| følgelig | consequently | consequence (formal) |
| således | thus, in this way | manner/consequence (formal/literary) |
| altså | so, that is, in other words | summing up / clarifying |
| likevel / allikevel | nevertheless, anyway | concession |
| imidlertid | however | contrast (formal-leaning) |
| derimot | on the other hand, by contrast | contrast |
| dessuten | besides, moreover | addition |
| ellers | otherwise, or else | condition/alternative |
A few usage notes. likevel and allikevel are interchangeable; allikevel is a touch more emphatic and very common in speech. imidlertid and følgelig and således lean (formal) — you meet them in newspapers, reports and essays more than in chat. altså is the everyday "so / I mean", a workhorse of spoken Norwegian.
Vi rakk ikke toget. Følgelig måtte vi ta en taxi.
We missed the train. Consequently we had to take a taxi. (formal)
Spør om hjelp nå, ellers blir det for sent.
Ask for help now, otherwise it'll be too late.
Hun likte ikke planen. Imidlertid gikk hun med på den.
She didn't like the plan. However, she agreed to it. (formal-leaning)
Jeg har spist. Jeg vil derimot gjerne ha en kaffe.
I've eaten. I would, on the other hand, like a coffee.
Notice derimot in that last example sitting mid-field after the verb — proof it is an adverb, not a conjunction.
Subordinate clauses: inversion does not apply
V2 inversion is a main-clause phenomenon. Inside a subordinate clause (after at, fordi, hvis, når…), Norwegian keeps subject before verb regardless, and a conjunctional adverb tucks into the adverb slot before the verb, just like ikke.
Jeg vet at han derfor ble hjemme.
I know that he therefore stayed home. (subordinate — no inversion)
Hun sa at de likevel ville komme.
She said they would come anyway. (subordinate — no inversion)
So the inversion rule is specifically: fronted in a main clause → invert. Don't carry it into subordinate clauses.
Common Mistakes
Not inverting after a fronted conjunctional adverb. This is the number-one English-speaker error: "Therefore we stayed" maps wrongly to Derfor vi ble.
❌ Derfor vi ble hjemme.
Incorrect — fronted adverb forces verb before subject.
✅ Derfor ble vi hjemme.
Therefore we stayed home.
Treating derfor/dermed like the conjunction så and skipping inversion. Even så ("so") behaves as an adverb when it introduces a result clause and triggers inversion (Det regnet, så vi ble inne — here så is a conjunction, no inversion — but Så ble vi inne with fronting does invert). When in doubt with derfor/dermed/følgelig, always invert.
❌ Dermed han mistet jobben.
Incorrect — dermed is an adverb; invert.
✅ Dermed mistet han jobben.
And so he lost his job.
Inverting after the real conjunctions og/men/for. The opposite over-correction: conjunctions keep subject–verb order.
❌ Han ble hjemme, for var han syk.
Incorrect — 'for' is a conjunction; keep subject before verb.
✅ Han ble hjemme, for han var syk.
He stayed home, for he was ill.
Trying to float a conjunction into the mid-field. Only adverbs can sit mid-clause.
❌ Vi gikk tur, vi men ble våte.
Incorrect — 'men' is a conjunction and cannot move into the clause.
✅ Vi gikk tur, men vi ble våte.
We went for a walk, but we got wet.
Key Takeaways
- derfor, dermed, likevel, allikevel, imidlertid, derimot, dessuten, altså, følgelig, således, ellers are adverbs — fronting them triggers V2 inversion (Derfor dro vi).
- The real conjunctions og, men, for (and eller, så) are glue between clauses and keep subject–verb order (…for vi dro).
- Test: front it — if the verb jumps before the subject, it's an adverb; if the clause stays subject–verb, it's a conjunction. Adverbs can also sit mid-field (Vi dro derfor); conjunctions can't.
- imidlertid, følgelig, således lean formal; altså, likevel, allikevel are everyday.
- Inversion is a main-clause rule only — subordinate clauses keep subject before verb.
Now practice Norwegian
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Norwegian→Related Topics
- Logical Connectors: derfor, likevel, dessuten, imidlertidB1 — The conjunctional adverbs that link clauses — derfor, dermed, likevel, dessuten, imidlertid, altså, da, ellers — why they are adverbs (not conjunctions) and therefore trigger V2 inversion when fronted, unlike English 'therefore/however' and unlike Norwegian men.
- Inversion: Fronting and Subject-Verb SwitchA1 — When any non-subject — a time word, an object, even a whole subordinate clause — is fronted into first position, V2 forces the subject to move behind the finite verb; English never does this, which makes it the signature learner error.
- Coordinating Conjunctions: men, eller, for, såA2 — How men (but), eller (or), for (for/because) and så (so) join equal clauses without disturbing word order, and why for is a coordinating 'because' that behaves nothing like the subordinating fordi.
- Focus Particles: bare, til og med, selv, ikke engangB2 — Scalar and focus particles — bare/kun (only), også (also), selv / til og med / sågar (even), ikke engang (not even), heller ikke (neither), nettopp (exactly) — how they latch onto one constituent, why their position rewrites the meaning, and the register split among the three words for 'even'.