Barnet giver kaninen en lille godbid, før hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet.

In Danish, the definite article is usually attached to the end of the noun.

• barn = child → barnet = the child
• kanin = rabbit → kaninen = the rabbit
• skab = cupboard/cabinet → skabet = the cupboard/cabinet

Very roughly:

• common gender nouns often take -en
• neuter nouns often take -et

So:

• kaninen is common gender
• barnet and skabet are neuter

A useful extra point: when there is an adjective in front of a definite noun, Danish often switches to a separate article, as in den bløde snor.

Because they are in the present tense.

• at give = to give → giver = gives / is giving
• at lægge = to lay / put → lægger = lays / puts / is putting

In Danish, the present tense very often ends in -r, no matter who the subject is:

• jeg giver
• du giver
• hun giver
• barnet giver

So unlike English, the verb form usually does not change for different persons.

This is a definite vs. indefinite difference.

• kaninen = the rabbit → a specific rabbit, already known in the situation
• en lille godbid = a small treat → one treat, not previously identified as a specific one

So the sentence treats the rabbit and the cupboard as known/specific, but the treat as just one item being given.

Because Danish, like English, can use give with two objects directly:

• Barnet giver kaninen en lille godbid. = The child gives the rabbit a small treat.

You can also say:

• Barnet giver en lille godbid til kaninen.

Both are correct. The version without til is very natural and common when you have:

• indirect object: kaninen
• direct object: en lille godbid

So this works much like English give someone something.

Because godbid is a common gender noun, so it takes en, not et.

• en godbid = a treat

So:

• en lille godbid = a small treat

Also, lille is the normal singular form of small before a noun:

• en lille godbid
• et lille barn

So even though the article changes between en and et, lille stays the same here.

This is a very common Danish pattern.

Without an adjective, the definite form is attached to the noun:

• snor = string/cord/leash
• snoren = the string/cord/leash

But when a definite noun has an adjective before it, Danish usually uses:

• den/det/de + adjective + noun

So:

• den bløde snor = the soft string/leash

Not:

• den bløde snoren

Also notice that the adjective becomes bløde, not blød, because adjectives usually take -e in this kind of definite phrase.

Snor can mean several related things in English, depending on context:

• string
• cord
• line
• leash
• lead

In this sentence, if the rabbit is a pet being handled, leash or lead may be the most natural translation. If the context is more general, soft cord/string could also work.

So snor is a flexible word, and the best English choice depends on the situation.

Tilbage means back.

So:

• lægger den bløde snor i skabet = puts the soft leash/cord in the cupboard
• lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet = puts the soft leash/cord back in the cupboard

With tilbage, the idea is that the leash/cord was there before and is being returned to its usual place.

Because før introduces a subordinate clause.

In Danish subordinate clauses, the normal order is:

• subject + finite verb

So:

• før hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet

That is why you get hun lægger, not inversion.

This is different from main clauses, where Danish follows the verb-second rule.

For example:

• Hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet.
  = main clause

But after før, it becomes a subordinate clause, so the word order stays hun lægger.

It can be ambiguous without more context.

A few important points:

• barnet is grammatically neuter, so the purely grammatical pronoun would be det
• but when talking about a real child whose sex is known, Danish can use natural-gender pronouns: han or hun

So hun can absolutely refer to the child if the child is a girl.

Could it refer to the rabbit? In principle, yes, if the rabbit is known to be female. People often use han/hun for animals when sex is known, especially pets.

So in isolation, hun is not perfectly clear. Context tells you who she is.

Because lægge and ligge are different verbs.

• lægge = to lay / put something somewhere
• ligge = to lie / be lying somewhere

In this sentence, someone is actively putting something somewhere:

• hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet

There is a direct object:

• den bløde snor

So lægger is the correct choice.

If you said snoren ligger i skabet, that would mean:

• the leash/cord is lying in the cupboard

That describes its position, not the action of putting it there.

Because før hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet is a subordinate clause, and the sentence is written with a comma before it.

In Danish, you will see two accepted comma styles. Many writers use a comma before subordinate clauses like this, and many learners are taught that pattern early on.

So here the comma simply marks the boundary between:

• main clause: Barnet giver kaninen en lille godbid
• subordinate clause: før hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet

You may also see similar sentences written without that comma, depending on comma style.

Yes.

You can say:

• Før hun lægger den bløde snor tilbage i skabet, giver barnet kaninen en lille godbid.

When the før clause comes first, the main clause still has to follow Danish verb-second word order, so you get:

• giver barnet not
• barnet giver

That is a very useful Danish pattern to learn: when something comes first, the finite verb in the main clause usually comes before the subject.

Because i means in/inside.

• i skabet = in the cupboard / in the cabinet

That fits the idea of putting something inside a cupboard.

Compare:

• på skabet = on the cupboard / on top of the cupboard

So i is the natural choice here.

Danish often uses i both for location and for movement into something, where English sometimes makes a stronger distinction with in vs into. If needed, Danish can also say ind i skabet for extra emphasis on movement inward, but plain i skabet is very normal here.