Learn Hardcore Icelandic: Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða hvort við verðum áfram í borginni. - I do not know whether we will move to the countryside or whether we will stay in the city.

hvort = “whether / if” in reported questions after verbs like vita (to know), spyrja (to ask), velta fyrir sér (to wonder), etc.
- Ég veit ekki hvort hann kemur. – I don’t know whether he is coming.
ef = “if” in conditional sentences (“if X happens, then Y”).
- Ef við flytjum í sveitina, verðum við ánægð. – If we move to the countryside, we will be happy.
að = “that” (complementizer).
- Ég veit að við flytjum í sveitina. – I know that we are moving to the countryside.

So:

Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum... ✅ (indirect question)
Ég veit ekki ef við flytjum... ❌ (ungrammatical in standard Icelandic)
Ég veit ekki að við flytjum... ❌ (wrong meaning: I don’t know that we are moving…).

Why is the word order hvort við flytjum and not hvort flytjum við, like in a direct question?

In Icelandic, direct questions usually have the finite verb in second position, often before the subject:

Flytjum við í sveitina? – Are we moving to the countryside?

But after a subordinating word like hvort, the clause becomes a subordinate clause, and then Icelandic uses normal subject–verb order (SVO), not question order:

Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum í sveitina. – I don’t know whether we are moving to the countryside.

So:

hvort við flytjum ✅ (subordinate clause word order)
hvort flytjum við ❌ (would only be possible as a direct question with hvort fronted for emphasis, which is a different structure).

The English meaning is future (“will move / will stay”). Why are flytjum and verðum in the present tense? Does Icelandic have no future tense?

Icelandic normally uses the present tense to talk about the future when the context makes the time clear:

Ég kem á morgun. – I’m coming / I will come tomorrow.
Við förum heim eftir hádegi. – We go / will go home after noon.

Your sentence follows this pattern:

við flytjum í sveitina – we will move to the countryside
við verðum áfram í borginni – we will stay in the city

There is a way to mark the future more explicitly, using munu + infinitive:

Ég veit ekki hvort við munum flytja í sveitina eða hvort við munum vera áfram í borginni.

That’s also correct, just a bit heavier. The simple present is very common and perfectly natural for future reference.

Why is the negation ekki placed as Ég veit ekki, and not before the verb or at the end?

In neutral Icelandic word order, the basic pattern in a simple clause is:

Subject – finite verb – (objects/adverbs)

The negation ekki usually comes right after the finite verb:

Ég veit ekki. – I don’t know.
Hann kemur ekki. – He is not coming.
Við sjáum þau ekki. – We don’t see them.

So in your sentence:

Ég veit ekki hvort… – I don’t know whether…

Forms like:

*Ég ekki veit… ❌
*Ég veit hvort… ekki. ❌

are ungrammatical in standard Icelandic.

Why is it í sveitina but í borginni? Why different case endings?

This is the classic accusative vs dative with the preposition í:

í + accusative → movement into something / to a place (direction).
í + dative → location / in a place (no movement).

In your sentence:

í sveitina: accusative singular definite of sveit
- Means “to the countryside” (movement: we might go there).
í borginni: dative singular definite of borg
- Means “in the city” (location: already there, staying there).

So:

Við flytjum í sveitina. – We (will) move to the countryside. (motion → accusative)
Við verðum áfram í borginni. – We (will) stay in the city. (location → dative)

What exactly is the difference between sveitina, sveitinni, and just sveit?

All three forms come from the noun sveit (fem., “countryside, rural area”):

sveit – nominative/accusative singular, indefinite
- Við erum í sveit. – We are in (some) countryside.
sveitina – accusative singular definite (“the countryside”)
- Við flytjum í sveitina. – We (will) move to the countryside.
sveitinni – dative singular definite
- Við erum í sveitinni. – We are in the countryside.

In your sentence í sveitina uses:

í
- accusative (motion)
-ina as the definite suffix

Semantically, í sveitina often means “out to the country” as a familiar sort of place, not necessarily a specific, single village. The article can feel more general in Icelandic than English the.

Why is it verðum áfram í borginni and not erum áfram í borginni for “we will stay in the city”? What’s the difference between vera and verða here?

vera = “to be” (a state):
- Við erum í borginni. – We are in the city.
verða has several meanings, two important ones here:
1. “to become / to get”
2. “to end up / to be (somewhere) for a certain time, to stay/remain”, often with áfram

In við verðum áfram í borginni, verða áfram together means roughly:

to stay on, to remain, to continue to be (there)

So:

Við verðum áfram í borginni. – We will stay (on) in the city.

You could say vera áfram in some contexts, but verða áfram is the common, idiomatic way to express “stay/remain somewhere (for some further time)” in the future-like sense.

Do we really have to repeat hvort before the second option, or could we say it only once?

You can say it either way:

With repetition (your sentence):
- Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða hvort við verðum áfram í borginni.
Without repetition:
- Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða verðum áfram í borginni.

Both are grammatical and natural. Repeating hvort can make the structure a bit clearer or more balanced, but it’s not required. Many speakers would probably not repeat it in casual speech.

What does áfram add here? Is it necessary to say áfram?

áfram means “on, onwards, further, still/continuously”.

In við verðum áfram í borginni it adds the idea of continuation:

not just we will be in the city, but we will keep being / stay in the city.

Without áfram:

Ég veit ekki hvort við verðum í borginni. – could mean simply “whether we will be in the city” (with no explicit idea of staying on).

With áfram:

Ég veit ekki hvort við verðum áfram í borginni. – “whether we will stay on / remain in the city.”

So áfram is not grammatically required, but it expresses the nuance “stay (there) rather than move elsewhere.”

Could we also say Ég veit það ekki hvort…? Where does það belong, and is it needed?

Both patterns exist, but without það is more common in this structure:

Ég veit ekki hvort… – very natural.

If you use það, it usually directly follows the verb:

Ég veit það ekki. – I don’t know (that). (full stop)

If you then add the hvort-clause, það acts like a pronoun referring forward:

Ég veit það ekki, hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða hvort við verðum áfram í borginni.

This is stylistically heavier. In everyday speech/writing, people usually just say:

Ég veit ekki hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða verðum áfram í borginni.

Why is it við flytjum (with -yj-) and not við flytum? How is flytja conjugated?

The verb is að flytja (“to move (house), transport, deliver, perform (a play)” etc.). In the present tense it keeps -ytj- in the 1st person plural:

Present indicative of flytja:

ég flyt
þú flytur
hann/hún/það flytur
við flytjum
þið flytjið
þeir/þær/þau flytja

So við flytjum is the correct present 1st person plural form.
*flytum would be a spelling/pronunciation mistake here.

Are there more “future‑sounding” ways to say this in Icelandic, e.g. with munu or eiga eftir að?

Yes, you can make the future feel more explicit, for example:

Using munu + infinitive:
- Ég veit ekki hvort við munum flytja í sveitina eða hvort við munum vera áfram í borginni.
Using eiga eftir að + infinitive (often “still have to / yet to”):
- Ég veit ekki hvort við eigum eftir að flytja í sveitina eða hvort við eigum eftir að vera áfram í borginni.

However, in normal Icelandic the simple present you saw:

hvort við flytjum í sveitina eða (hvort) við verðum áfram í borginni

is completely standard and usually preferred unless you specifically want to emphasize “will (definitely) do X in the future” or “still have X left to do.”