Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Porten inn til hagen er låst, men vi kan gå inn utenfra med nøkkel. - The gate into the garden is locked, but we can enter from outside with a key.

Inn marks motion “to the inside,” while til is the preposition “to/toward.” In the noun phrase Porten inn til hagen, inn adds the idea of entering, and til hagen links the gate to the destination. Together they mean “the gate into the garden.” It’s a very common pattern with openings and paths: dør/vei/port inn til + place.

Could I also say Porten til hagen or Hageporten?

Yes. Both are natural:

Porten til hagen = “the gate to the garden” (neutral; the gate that leads to/belongs to the garden).
Hageporten = “the garden gate” (a compound; concise and very idiomatic).
Porten inn til hagen adds a nuance of crossing the boundary into the garden. All three are fine; choose based on the nuance you want.

What’s the difference between inn til and inn i here?

With motion into enclosed spaces, both inn til and inn i can appear, but they’re used a bit differently.

With verbs: gå inn i hagen is the standard way to say “go into the garden.”
With nouns like gate/door: both porten inn til hagen and porten inn i hagen occur. Inn i emphasizes the actual crossing into the space; inn til is very common with nouns referring to entrances and routes (dør/vei/port inn til …). In practice, both are understood as “into.”

Why is låst used here instead of stengt or lukket?

Låst = “locked” (secured with a lock/key). You cannot open it without a key.
Stengt = “closed/shut” (not necessarily locked; also used for “closed” businesses).
Lukket = “closed” (physically shut; more formal/literary in some contexts). Since the sentence mentions a key, låst is the precise choice.

Is er låst a passive? How is it different from blir låst?

Er låst (være + past participle) is the stative passive: it describes the resulting state—“is (in a state of being) locked.” Blir låst (bli + past participle) is the dynamic passive: “is being/getting locked” (an action happening). Here we want the state, so er låst is correct.

Does kan here mean ability or permission?

Kan can mean ability, possibility, or permission, depending on context. In this sentence it most naturally means “it’s possible for us to get in” (because we have a key). If you wanted to stress permission, you could say vi får (lov til å) gå inn …

Why gå inn and not komme inn?

Gå inn literally means “walk in,” so it highlights the action of walking through the gate. Komme inn is more neutral (“get/come in”) and is very common in everyday speech when the manner doesn’t matter. Both would be understood here; the choice depends on whether you want to emphasize the walking or simply the access. Other options include slippe inn (“be let in”) or låse (oss) inn (“unlock our way in”): Vi kan låse oss inn …

What’s the difference between inn and inne?

Inn: motion toward the inside (“in(wards)”): Han går inn (“He goes in”).
Inne: location inside (static “inside”): Han er inne (“He is inside”). In the sentence, gå inn is about movement through the gate, so inn is required.

What does utenfra mean, and is fra utsiden different?

Utenfra means “from the outside.” Fra utsiden (“from the outside (side)”) is a near-synonym. Utenfra is shorter and very idiomatic; fra utsiden can feel a bit more explicit. Either works: gå inn utenfra or gå inn fra utsiden.

Is the spelling utenifra acceptable?

Standard Norwegian spells it utenfra (without the extra i). Utenifra is a common misspelling. Stick to utenfra.

Is the word order vi kan gå inn utenfra med nøkkel natural? Can I move these bits around?

Yes, it’s natural. The particle inn stays close to the verb (gå inn). Then come adverbials: place (utenfra) and instrument/manner (med nøkkel). Time–place–manner is a common guideline in Norwegian, and placing place before instrument is very normal. Alternatives that also sound fine:

Vi kan gå inn fra utsiden med nøkkel.
Vi kan låse oss inn fra utsiden med (en) nøkkel. Less natural: Vi kan med nøkkel gå inn fra utsiden (sounds marked).

Why is there no article in med nøkkel? When would I use en or the definite form?

After med, Norwegian often drops the article to express the instrument/means in a general way: med bil (by car), med kniv (with a knife), med nøkkel (with a key). Use:

med nøkkel = with a key (in general; instrument)
med en nøkkel = with a (single) key (slightly more specific or contrastive)
med nøkkelen = with the key (a specific, known key)

What are the noun genders and forms for port, hage, and nøkkel?

All three are common as masculine in Bokmål:

en port → porten (def. sg.) → porter (indef. pl.) → portene (def. pl.)
en hage → hagen → hager → hagene
en nøkkel → nøkkelen → nøkler → nøklene Note the irregular plural nøkler (not “nøkkeler”).

Why is there a comma before men?

Men (“but”) links two main clauses here: Porten … er låst and vi kan gå inn … Norwegian punctuation rules require a comma before coordinating conjunctions (og, men, for, eller) when they join independent clauses, so the comma is standard and correct.

Could I say Porten i hagen, and would that mean the same thing?

Porten i hagen means “the gate in the garden” (located inside the garden). Porten til hagen means “the gate to the garden” (leading to it). Porten inn til hagen adds the idea of entry “into” the garden. So Porten i hagen is about location, not access into the garden.