Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.

to be

Breakdown of Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.

• í: in
• ljósið: the light
• stofan: the living room
• kveikt: on

Questions & Answers about Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.

What does the ending -in in ljósin mean, and why not just ljós?

Ljós is the basic form of the noun meaning light (or lamp), and it is a neuter noun.

• ljós = light (singular, indefinite)
• ljós = lights (plural, indefinite; neuter plural often looks the same as singular)
• ljósin = the lights (nominative plural, definite)

The ending -in here is the definite article for neuter plural: ljós + in → ljósin = the lights.

So ljósin must be used instead of plain ljós because the English sentence is the lights are on, not just lights are on.

Why is it eru and not er?

Eru is the plural form of the verb vera (to be) in the present tense.

• hann er = he is (3rd person singular)
• það er = it is
• ljósið er = the light is (singular)
• ljósin eru = the lights are (plural)

Since ljósin is plural (the lights), the verb must agree and be eru, not er.

What exactly is kveikt, and what does it correspond to in English grammar?

Kveikt is the past participle of the verb kveikja (to light, to turn on).

• kveikja ljósin = to turn on the lights
• að hafa kveikt ljósin = to have turned on the lights
• ljósin eru kveikt = the lights are turned on / the lights are on

In English terms, this is like “lit / turned on” used adjectivally:

• The lights are lit.
• The lights are turned on.

So kveikt here behaves like an adjective describing the state of the lights, formed from the verb.

Why is it kveikt and not something like kveiktir or kveiktar? Does kveikt agree with ljósin?

Yes, kveikt does agree with ljósin, but the forms are a bit tricky.

The pattern for the past participle of kveikja is (nominative):

• masculine singular: kveiktur
• feminine singular: kveikt
• neuter singular: kveikt
• neuter plural: kveikt

So the neuter plural form is also kveikt. That’s why you don’t see a special plural ending here.

• ljósið er kveikt = the light (n.sg.neut.) is on
• ljósin eru kveikt = the lights (n.pl.neut.) are on

The form kveikt is therefore correct agreement with a neuter plural subject; it just happens to look the same as the neuter singular and feminine singular forms.

What is the basic form of stofunni, and what does the ending -unni mean?

The basic (dictionary) form is stofa = living room (feminine noun).

Case forms (singular, indefinite):

• nominative: stofa
• accusative: stofu
• dative: stofu
• genitive: stofu

Definite forms (singular):

• nominative: stofan = the living room
• accusative: stofuna
• dative: stofunni = in/to the living room (as an object of a preposition)
• genitive: stofunnar

So stofunni is dative singular definite: the living room in the dative case.
The -unni ending comes from -u (dative stem) + inni (definite ending), which contracts to -unni.

Why is it í stofunni (dative) and not í stofuna (accusative)?

In Icelandic, the preposition í (in, into) can take either:

• dative → for location / being in a place
• accusative → for movement into a place

Here we are talking about where the lights are:

• Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.
  The lights are on in the living room.
  → static location → dative: stofunni

If you describe movement into the living room, you use accusative:

• Ég fer í stofuna. = I go into the living room.

So í stofunni is correct because it expresses location, not motion.

Could the word order be different, like Ljósin í stofunni eru kveikt or Í stofunni eru ljósin kveikt?

Yes, Icelandic word order is fairly flexible, as long as the finite verb stays in second position in main clauses (the V2 rule).

All of these are possible and natural, with small differences in emphasis:

1. Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.
   Neutral: The lights are on in the living room.

2. Ljósin í stofunni eru kveikt.
   Slightly more emphasis on the lights that are in the living room (as opposed to some other lights).

3. Í stofunni eru ljósin kveikt.
   Here, í stofunni is put first for emphasis on location:
   In the living room, the lights are on.

In (3), notice the verb eru comes right after Í stofunni, keeping the verb in second position, which Icelandic requires.

How would you say “The lights are being turned on in the living room” (an action happening now), and how is that different from this sentence?

The original sentence:

• Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni.
  describes a state: The lights are on (have been turned on and are now on).

To emphasize the ongoing action “are being turned on”, you would typically use a construction with vera að + infinitive:

• Það er verið að kveikja á ljósunum í stofunni.
  Literally: It is being done to turn on the lights in the living room.

Or slightly more informal:

• Það er verið að kveikja ljósin í stofunni.

Key difference:

• eru kveikt = stative passive (the lights are in the “on” state).
• er verið að kveikja = progressive-like construction, focusing on the ongoing action of turning them on.

How would you say “The lights in the living room are off”?

The opposite of kveikt (on, lit) is slökkt (off, extinguished).

You can say, parallel to the original sentence:

• Ljósin í stofunni eru slökkt.
  = The lights in the living room are off.

Or keep the original structure and just change kveikt:

• Ljósin eru slökkt í stofunni.
  (Same meaning, slightly different emphasis / word order.)

What’s the difference between Ljósin eru kveikt (í stofunni) and Það er kveikt á ljósunum (í stofunni)?

Both can translate as The lights are on (in the living room), but the structure is different:

1. Ljósin eru kveikt (í stofunni).

   • Subject: ljósin (the lights)
   • Verb: eru
   • Past participle: kveikt
     This is a stative passive: the lights are in the “on” state.

2. Það er kveikt á ljósunum (í stofunni).

   • Dummy subject: það (“there/it”)
   • Verb: er
   • Past participle: kveikt
   • Prepositional phrase: á ljósunum (on the lights)
     Literally something like: There is “turned-on-ness” on the lights.

This second pattern (vera + kveikt á + dative) is very natural Icelandic and often preferred in speech:

• Það er kveikt á ljósunum í stofunni.
  = The lights are on in the living room.

Both are correct; Ljósin eru kveikt is a bit more straightforward structurally, while Það er kveikt á ljósunum is very idiomatic.

How do you pronounce ljósin and stofunni, especially lj and the nn?

Approximate pronunciation (not strict IPA):

• ljósin ≈ LYO-sin

  • lj is a palatalized l + j sound, a bit like saying “ly” in “million”, but clearer.
  • ó is a long “o” sound, like in “told”.
  • Stress is on the first syllable: LJÓ-sin.

• stofunni ≈ STO-fu-ni

  • o as in “stop” (but a bit tenser/rounder).
  • fu like “foo” but shorter.
  • The nn in -unni is a long n (geminate); hold the [n] slightly longer than in English.
  • Stress on the first syllable: STO-fu-ni.

These are simplified guidelines, but they’re close enough to be understood.

Is this sentence more formal or informal, and would it sound natural in everyday speech?

Ljósin eru kveikt í stofunni. is neutral and perfectly natural. You could use it:

• in everyday conversation,
• in written description,
• in narration, etc.

In casual speech, many people will very often say:

• Það er kveikt á ljósunum í stofunni.

Both are idiomatic; neither is particularly formal. The choice is mostly about style and emphasis, not formality.