Learn Hardcore Icelandic: Hún fer í bankann til að tala við stjóra um launin. - She goes to the bank to talk with the boss about the salary.

í + accusative is used for motion into a place: í bankann = into/to the bank (going there).
í + dative is used for location: í bankanum = in/inside the bank (already there).
til + genitive means to/towards, often used with people or places you go to without the idea of entering (e.g., til læknis “to the doctor”). With buildings you physically go into, Icelandic normally uses í, so say í bankann.

What does the -ann ending in bankann mean?

It’s the suffixed definite article in the accusative singular for a masculine noun. The noun is banki (a bank). With the definite article:

Nominative: bankinn (the bank)
Accusative: bankann (to/into the bank)
Dative: bankanum (in/at the bank)
Genitive: bankans (of the bank)

Can I say í banka instead of í bankann?

Yes. Í banka = “to a bank” (nonspecific). Í bankann = “to the bank” (a specific or understood bank). In everyday speech, Icelandic often uses the definite form for routine destinations (í bankann, í búðina, í skólann) even if English would say “to the bank/the store/the school” generically.

Why is it til að tala rather than just að tala?

Til að + infinitive expresses purpose: “in order to.” So til að tala = “in order to talk.” If you say fara að tala, that usually means “start to talk/begin talking,” not purpose. Using just að tala after fer would suggest that “begin to” meaning and is best avoided here.

Is til þess að also correct here?

Yes. Til þess að tala is fully correct and a bit more formal or explicit. Til að is more common in neutral speech.

Why tala við and not tala með?

tala við e-n = talk to/with someone (your interlocutor).
með means “with” in the sense of accompaniment or instrument, not the addressee of speech. You might say tala saman (“talk together”) or tala í símann (“speak on the phone”), but addressing a person is tala við.

What cases do við and um take, and how does that affect stjóra and launin?

við + accusative, so stjóri (manager) becomes stjóra in the accusative singular: tala við stjóra.
um + accusative, so you get um launin. Note that laun is neuter plural; nominative and accusative look the same, and with the definite article it’s launin.

Is við stjóra singular or plural?

Ambiguous in form. For the noun stjóri, both accusative singular and accusative plural are stjóra. Context usually makes it singular. If you need clarity:

Singular definite: við stjórann (“the manager”)
Plural: add a quantifier or article, e.g., við marga stjóra (“many managers”) or við stjórana (“the managers”).

If I mean the bank’s manager specifically, what should I say?

Use the definite form and the compound for “bank manager”:

tala við bankastjórann = talk to the bank manager (specific person). You can also say tala við stjórann, if it’s clear which manager you mean.

Why is it um launin and not um laun?

Both exist:

um laun = about (some) wages/salary (nonspecific).
um launin = about the wages/salary (specific/known in context). “Definite” is natural if there’s a known salary under discussion.

How do I say “about her salary”? Do I use hennar or sín?

If it’s her own salary (the subject’s), use the reflexive possessive sín: typically um launin sín (postposed, very idiomatic) or um sín laun (preposed).
If it’s someone else’s salary, use hennar: typically postposed um launin hennar. Note on word order:
Preposed possessive (e.g., sín laun) → no definite article on the noun.
Postposed possessive (e.g., launin sín/hennar) → the noun usually takes the definite article.

Why are laun plural when English says “salary” in the singular?

Laun is a plural-only noun in Icelandic (pluralia tantum), meaning “wages/pay.” It takes plural agreement: Launin eru lág/há (“The wages are low/high”). Context can correspond to “salary” in English.

Could I use a more formal verb than tala for discussing pay?

Yes, ræða (við) is common and a bit more formal: til að ræða við (banka)stjórann um launin = “to discuss the salary with the (bank) manager.”

How is til að and stjóra pronounced in fluent speech?

til að is often pronounced close to “tila” (the ð in að weakens or disappears).
stjóra: the stj cluster sounds like “styoh-” and ó is a diphthong like “yo”: roughly “STYOH-ra.”
launin: au is a diphthong like “öy/oy”: roughly “LOI-nin.” These are approximations; Icelandic phonology has specific sounds you’ll pick up with listening practice.

How do I conjugate fara (fer) and talk about the future?

Present: ég fer, þú ferð, hann/hún fer, við förum, þið farið, þeir/þær/þau fara
Past: ég fór, þú fórst, hann/hún fór, við fórum, þið fóruð, þeir/þær/þau fóru
Future is usually expressed with the present or with ætla að: Hún fer í bankann á morgun / Hún ætlar að fara í bankann á morgun.

What’s the difference between fer and fær?

fer = “goes” (from fara).
fær = “gets/receives” or “gives” (3rd sg of fá / gefa middle forms); it has an accent and a different vowel sound. Don’t mix them up in writing or speech.

Can I reorder við stjóra and um launin?

Yes. Both are fine:

… til að tala við stjóra um launin.
… til að tala um launin við stjóra. Choose the order that makes the focus clearest in context.

Can I say inn í bankann?

Yes. inn í bankann adds an explicit “inward” sense (“in into the bank”), often for emphasis or contrast. For ordinary “go to the bank,” í bankann is enough.