Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Hun var skuffet fordi møtet ble avlyst. - She was disappointed because the meeting was cancelled.

Norwegian usually puts definiteness on the noun as a suffix (like -et, -en, -a), so you don’t use a separate article in front of a bare noun. You only add a separate determiner with adjectives (double definiteness): det viktige møtet = the important meeting.

Can I start the sentence with the reason clause?

Yes: Fordi møtet ble avlyst, var hun skuffet. Put a comma after the subordinate clause, and remember main-clause V2: the finite verb var comes before the subject (var hun skuffet).

Why is it møtet ble avlyst and not ble møtet avlyst after fordi?

After a subordinator like fordi, Norwegian does not use V2 word order. The finite verb comes after the subject: fordi [subject] [verb] … → fordi møtet ble avlyst.

Do I put a comma before fordi?

Normally, no: Hun var skuffet fordi møtet ble avlyst. You do place a comma if the fordi-clause comes first: Fordi møtet ble avlyst, var hun skuffet.

What’s the difference between fordi and for?

Both can mean because, but:

fordi introduces a subordinate clause and usually takes no comma before it: Hun dro tidlig fordi hun var trøtt.
for is a coordinating conjunction, feels a bit more written/formal, and takes a comma: Hun dro tidlig, for hun var trøtt. After for, the next clause has main-clause V2 word order.

Where does negation go in this sentence type?

In the main clause: Hun var ikke skuffet … (finite verb + ikke)
In the fordi-clause: … fordi møtet ikke ble avlyst. (subject + ikke
- verb)

Why ble avlyst and not var avlyst?

ble avlyst (became/was canceled) focuses on the event of cancellation.
var avlyst (was canceled) describes the resulting state. Both can be correct depending on what you want to emphasize.

Is there another passive I could use instead of ble avlyst?

Yes, the s-passive exists but is less common in speech and can sound formal here: Møtet avlystes. You’ll most often hear Møtet ble avlyst. For a stative passive, use være: Møtet er/var avlyst.

What exactly is avlyst?

It’s the past participle of avlyse (to cancel): avlyse – avlyste – har avlyst. In ble avlyst, it forms a passive. It can also be an adjective: Møtet er avlyst (the meeting is canceled). A common alternative is kansellert: Møtet ble kansellert (often used in travel/transport contexts).

What’s the nuance between Hun var skuffet and Hun ble skuffet?

Hun var skuffet states a condition (she was in a disappointed state).
Hun ble skuffet highlights the change into that state (she became disappointed).

How does skuffet behave as an adjective?

Predicatively (after a linking verb), it doesn’t change: Hun er/var skuffet. Attributively, singular is skuffet and plural is skuffede: en skuffet kunde, skuffede kunder. Colloquial Bokmål may also use skuffa.

Can I use other ways to say because, like siden or på grunn av?

siden can mean since (because), often at the start: Hun var skuffet siden møtet ble avlyst.
på grunn av is a preposition and must take a noun phrase: Hun var skuffet på grunn av avlysningen av møtet. Avoid på grunn av at in careful style; prefer fordi for clauses.

Is møte also a verb?

Yes. å møte = to meet. Verb forms: møter – møtte – har møtt. Don’t confuse the noun møtet (the meeting) with the verb forms: Hun møtte ham (she met him).

Why hun and not henne?

hun is the subject (nominative) form; henne is the object form. Here, Hun is the subject of var.

Any quick pronunciation tips for the tricky words?

Hun: u is a fronted vowel (like a tight oo).
skuffet: sk is [sk] here (not sh), double f gives a short vowel: SKUF-fet.
fordi: stress the second syllable: for-DI.
møtet: ø like French eu in peu; final -et is a light -eh.
ble: long e, roughly “bleh.”
avlyst: y like French u in lune; final -st is pronounced.