Hun skulle have underskrevet kontrakten i morges, men udlejeren kom for sent.

Here skulle most naturally means was supposed to.

So Hun skulle have underskrevet kontrakten i morges is closer to:

• She was supposed to have signed the contract this morning
• rather than a strongly judgmental She should have signed the contract this morning

English should have often sounds like criticism. Danish skulle have can sometimes overlap with that idea, but in this sentence it mainly describes an expected or planned action that did not happen as intended.

Because the sentence is looking at the signing as something that was expected to be completed by that time.

Compare:

• Hun skulle underskrive kontrakten i morges
  = She was supposed to sign the contract this morning

• Hun skulle have underskrevet kontrakten i morges
  = She was supposed to have signed the contract this morning

The version with have + past participle adds a sense of completion. It suggests that by now, or by the point the speaker is talking from, the signing should already have happened.

That fits well with the second clause: men udlejeren kom for sent.

It is:

modal verb + have + past participle

In this sentence:

• skulle = finite modal verb
• have = infinitive
• underskrevet = past participle of underskrive

This is the same kind of pattern you see in:

• kunne have gjort = could have done
• ville have set = would have seen
• måtte have glemt = must have forgotten

So skulle have underskrevet is the Danish equivalent of was supposed to have signed / should have signed, depending on context.

Underskrevet is the past participle of underskrive.

The basic forms are:

• at underskrive = to sign
• underskriver = signs / is signing
• underskrev = signed
• underskrevet = signed

It appears here because after have in this structure, Danish uses the past participle:

• have underskrevet = have signed

So the form is not random—it is required by the grammar.

Because Danish usually adds the definite article to the end of the noun.

So:

• en kontrakt = a contract
• kontrakten = the contract

and

• en udlejer = a landlord
• udlejeren = the landlord

Unlike English, Danish often does not use a separate word like the. Instead, the noun gets a definite ending such as -en, -et, or -ne.

I morges means this morning or earlier this morning.

It is a fixed expression. A learner should especially avoid confusing it with:

• i morgen = tomorrow
• i morges = this morning

That final -s makes a big difference.

Also compare:

• om morgenen = in the morning / in the mornings
• i morges = this morning

So i morges refers to one specific morning, usually the morning of the current day or the relevant day in the conversation.

Because men is a coordinating conjunction, like English but. It starts a new main clause.

In a Danish main clause, the finite verb normally comes in second position. Here the subject is first:

• udlejeren = subject
• kom = finite verb

So the order is:

men + subject + verb + rest

That gives:

men udlejeren kom for sent

This is normal main-clause word order in Danish.

Here for means too.

So:

• for sent = too late / late
• for dyr = too expensive
• for hurtigt = too fast

This is not the same as the English preposition for in expressions like for you or for the house.

So in this sentence, kom for sent means that the landlord arrived too late.

Kom is the simple past of komme, and it is very natural here because the sentence is telling about a finished event in the past.

• kom = came
• er kommet = has come

Danish often uses the simple past in narration, especially when the event is clearly placed in the past. Since the sentence is about what happened this morning, kom is the most straightforward choice.

Yes, very strongly.

The first clause sets up an expectation:

• Hun skulle have underskrevet kontrakten i morges

Then the second clause gives the reason things did not go as planned:

• men udlejeren kom for sent

So the natural interpretation is that she did not sign it then, because the landlord arrived too late.

At the very least, it means the signing did not happen as scheduled.

Yes, absolutely.

That version is:

I morges skulle hun have underskrevet kontrakten, men udlejeren kom for sent.

This is also correct Danish. The difference is mainly emphasis. By putting i morges first, you highlight the time.

When a different element comes first in a Danish main clause, the finite verb still stays in second position, so the subject moves after it:

• Hun skulle have underskrevet kontrakten i morges
• I morges skulle hun have underskrevet kontrakten

This is a very important Danish word-order pattern.