Learn Hardcore Danish: Jeg rejser med fly og kuffert til storbyen i morgen tidlig. - I am traveling by plane with a suitcase to the big city early tomorrow.

Adding an article (med et fly) would sound like you’re focusing on one specific plane, which is usually unnecessary and odd in this type of sentence. So med fly is the normal, idiomatic form.

Is fly here a verb (to fly) or a noun (an airplane)?

In this sentence, fly is a noun, meaning airplane / plane.

As a noun: et fly (an airplane), flyet (the airplane)
As a verb: at flyve (to fly), jeg flyver (I fly / I’m flying)

Because it appears after med and in the common transport phrase med fly, it clearly functions as a noun: by plane.

Why is it med fly og kuffert? That sounds like “with plane and suitcase” – is that natural?

Yes, it’s natural Danish, but it has a different feel than English.

med fly describes the means of transport (by plane).
med kuffert describes what you have with you (with a suitcase).

So the Danish sentence is like saying:
I’m travelling, by plane and with a suitcase, to the big city tomorrow morning.

English usually wouldn’t phrase it exactly like that; we’d say something like I’m flying to the big city tomorrow morning with a suitcase. In Danish, repeating med is perfectly fine and feels quite normal: med fly og kuffert.

Could I say med en kuffert instead of med kuffert?

Yes, you can say med en kuffert, and that’s probably a bit more common in everyday speech:

med en kuffert = with a suitcase
med kuffert = with (a) suitcase, more generic / less specific

In many cases, Danes drop the article with objects you obviously have with you (like taske, kuffert) when the exact identity doesn’t matter. Both are grammatically fine; med en kuffert sounds a bit more like “one specific suitcase”, med kuffert is slightly more neutral and compact.

What exactly does storbyen mean, and why is there a -en at the end?

Storbyen literally means the big city.

en stor by = a big city
storbyen = the big city

The -en ending marks the definite singular form for a common-gender noun:

en by (a city) → byen (the city)
combine stor (big) + byen (the city) → storbyen (the big city)

So til storbyen = to the big city. It can mean a specific big city previously known from the context (e.g., Copenhagen), or simply “the big city” in a general, almost symbolic sense (city vs countryside).

Why is it til storbyen and not i storbyen?

Til and i have different roles:

til is used with movement towards a destination:
- jeg rejser til storbyen = I’m travelling to the big city
i is used for being inside / in a place:
- jeg er i storbyen = I’m in the big city

So here, because you are going there (movement), you use til, not i.

What does i morgen tidlig mean exactly, and can I separate the words?

i morgen tidlig means tomorrow morning (early). It’s a fixed time expression:

i morgen = tomorrow
tidlig = early
i morgen tidlig = tomorrow early (i.e. early tomorrow morning)

You treat it as one time phrase. You don’t normally insert other words between morgen and tidlig here. You can, however, move the whole phrase around in the sentence (see next question).

Where can i morgen tidlig go in the sentence? Is the word order flexible?

Yes, Danish allows some flexibility with time expressions. All of these are correct, with slightly different emphasis:

Jeg rejser med fly og kuffert til storbyen i morgen tidlig.
I morgen tidlig rejser jeg med fly og kuffert til storbyen.
Jeg rejser i morgen tidlig med fly og kuffert til storbyen. (less common, but possible)

The most neutral is usually like the original: main clause first, time at the end. Putting i morgen tidlig at the beginning adds emphasis on when you’re travelling.

Why is it i morgen and not på morgen or om morgen?

The preposition i is used for days / longer periods:

i dag = today
i morgen = tomorrow
i går = yesterday
i næste uge = next week

På is used for parts of the day and weekdays:

på morgenen / om morgenen = in the morning (in general)
på mandag = on Monday

So i morgen tidlig (tomorrow early) is the fixed, idiomatic form for tomorrow morning (early).

Why doesn’t the Danish sentence use a continuous form like “I am travelling”?

Danish doesn’t have a special -ing continuous tense like English.

Jeg rejser can mean:

I travel (in general)
I am travelling / I’m going (right now or in the near future)

The context and time expression (i morgen tidlig) make it clear that this is about a planned future trip, so jeg rejser naturally translates to I’m travelling / I’m going in English.

How would you make this sentence past tense?

Change rejser (present) to rejste (past):

Jeg rejser med fly og kuffert til storbyen i morgen tidlig.
→ Jeg rejste med fly og kuffert til storbyen i morges tidlig.
(I travelled by plane and with a suitcase to the big city early this morning.)

If you still want “yesterday morning” instead of “this morning”:

Jeg rejste med fly og kuffert til storbyen i går morges.
(I travelled by plane and with a suitcase to the big city yesterday morning.)

Does Danish stress or intonation change the meaning in this sentence?

The basic meaning stays the same, but stress changes what you highlight:

Stress on rejser: focusing on the fact that you are the one travelling.
- Jeg REJSER med fly... (not staying home, not driving, etc.)
Stress on fly: focusing on by plane vs other transport.
- Jeg rejser med FLY og kuffert...
Stress on i morgen tidlig: focusing on when.
- Jeg rejser med fly og kuffert til storbyen i MORGEN TIDLIG.

This is similar to English shifting stress for emphasis. The grammar doesn’t change; only the nuance.