Við biðum ekki standandi í ganginum; við vorum sitjandi á stólunum og töluðum rólega.

Biðum is the 1st person plural past tense of bíða (to wait), so við biðum means we waited or, in context, we were waiting.

A learner may expect Icelandic to have a special past continuous form like English were waiting, but Icelandic usually just uses the ordinary past tense and lets the context show whether the action was ongoing:

• við biðum = we waited / we were waiting

So in this sentence, biðum is completely natural for an ongoing past situation.

In ordinary Icelandic main clauses, ekki usually comes after the finite verb.

So:

• Við biðum ekki = We did not wait / We were not waiting

This is very normal Icelandic word order. English puts not after an auxiliary verb (did not wait, were not waiting), but Icelandic often puts ekki directly after the main finite verb.

Standandi is the present participle of standa (to stand). Here it means standing.

In this sentence it describes the physical position or posture of the subject while the waiting was happening:

• Við biðum ekki standandi = We were not waiting standing up

So it is not the main verb. The main verb is biðum. Standandi adds extra information about how they were waiting, or rather how they were not waiting.

This is a very common learner question. Icelandic can certainly use ordinary verbs such as:

• við stóðum = we stood / were standing
• við sátum = we sat / were sitting

But standandi and sitjandi are often used to describe someone’s posture or state during another action.

So:

• Við biðum ekki standandi focuses on not being in a standing position while waiting
• Við vorum sitjandi á stólunum focuses on being in a seated position

This can sound slightly more descriptive than just using stóðum or sátum. In some contexts, it can also feel more like being in that state rather than simply naming the action.

Both are possible, but they are not exactly identical in feel.

• við sátum á stólunum = we sat / were sitting on the chairs
• við vorum sitjandi á stólunum = we were sitting / were seated on the chairs

Vorum sitjandi emphasizes the ongoing seated posture. It is a little more descriptive and can sound slightly more formal, narrative, or vivid than the simpler sátum.

So the sentence contrasts two physical situations:

• not standing in the hallway
• but sitting on the chairs

Using standandi and sitjandi makes that contrast especially clear.

Here í takes the dative because it expresses location, not movement.

• í ganginum = in the hallway

A very important Icelandic pattern is:

• í + dative for being in a place
• í + accusative for movement into a place

Compare:

• Við biðum í ganginum. = We waited in the hallway.
• Við fórum í ganginn. = We went into the hallway.

So ganginum is dative singular definite.

Because ganginum means the hallway in the dative singular.

The base noun is:

• gangur = hallway, corridor

Its forms include:

• nominative singular: gangur
• accusative singular: gang
• dative singular: gangi
• dative singular definite: ganginum

Since the sentence means in the hallway, and í with location takes the dative, the form becomes í ganginum.

The ending -num is the definite article attached to the noun, so it means the, not just a.

Á stólunum is dative plural definite.

Just like í, the preposition á changes case depending on meaning:

• á + dative = location on
• á + accusative = movement onto

Here the meaning is location:

• við vorum sitjandi á stólunum = we were sitting on the chairs

So the dative plural is used.

The noun is:

• stóll = chair

Relevant forms:

• nominative plural: stólar
• dative plural: stólum
• dative plural definite: stólunum

So á stólunum means on the chairs.

Because Icelandic often uses the definite form when the place or objects are understood as specific in the situation.

So:

• í ganginum = in the hallway
• á stólunum = on the chairs

This sounds natural if the speaker and listener both know which hallway and which chairs are meant.

If the nouns were indefinite, the meaning would be more like:

• í gangi = in a hallway
• á stólum = on chairs

That would feel less specific.

Töluðum is the 1st person plural past tense of tala (to talk, speak), so:

• við töluðum = we talked / we were talking

Rólega is the adverb from rólegur (calm, quiet), and here it means something like:

• calmly
• quietly
• in a relaxed way

So töluðum rólega means we were talking calmly/quietly.

The exact English choice depends on context. If the scene is about not making noise, quietly works well. If the scene is about manner or mood, calmly may be better.

It can mean either, depending on context.

Icelandic does not normally have a separate tense that works exactly like the English past continuous. So the plain past tense often covers both ideas:

• við töluðum = we talked
• við töluðum = we were talking

In this sentence, because the whole description is about an ongoing past situation, English were talking is probably the most natural translation.

It is repeated because the sentence has two separate coordinated clauses:

• Við biðum ekki standandi í ganginum
• við vorum sitjandi á stólunum og töluðum rólega

Repeating við makes the structure clear and creates a balanced contrast between the two parts. Icelandic often does this, just as English can:

• We were not waiting in the hall; we were sitting on the chairs...

It would sound less clear if the second clause did not have an explicit subject.

The semicolon links two closely related statements that contrast with each other:

• not standing in the hallway
• but sitting on chairs and talking quietly

It works a bit like a stronger comma or a softer full stop. In English, the same sentence could also be written with a full stop, and in Icelandic a full stop would also be possible. The semicolon simply highlights the relationship between the two clauses.

Yes. The contrast is strongly felt even without an explicit en (but).

The first clause says what was not happening:

• Við biðum ekki standandi í ganginum

The second clause says what was happening instead:

• við vorum sitjandi á stólunum og töluðum rólega

So in English, a translation with but often sounds natural:

• We were not waiting standing in the hallway; rather, we were sitting on the chairs and talking quietly.

The Icelandic contrast comes from the overall structure, the negation, and the semicolon.

Yes. A simpler version might be:

• Við stóðum ekki í ganginum; við sátum á stólunum og töluðum rólega.

That would still be natural and clear.

However, the original version with standandi and sitjandi is more expressive about posture and gives the sentence a slightly more descriptive tone. So the original is not unnecessarily complicated; it just chooses a more vivid way to describe the scene.

In practical terms, it describes the subject’s posture during the action.

So grammatically the main verb is still biðum, but standandi í ganginum tells us what physical position we would have been in while waiting. That is why it can be understood as describing the subject during the action of the verb.

A good way to think of it is:

• Við biðum ekki [standandi í ganginum]
• We were not waiting [while standing in the hallway]

Yes, the overall pattern is very natural. In particular, these features are common:

• plain past tense used where English might use was/were ...-ing
• ekki after the finite verb
• location expressed with í/á + dative
• participle-like forms such as standandi and sitjandi to describe posture or state

So even if the exact sentence is a bit carefully worded, it uses very real and useful Icelandic patterns.