Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Treneren lar oss spille videre, derimot må vi stå stille når han blåser. - The coach lets us keep playing, on the other hand we must stand still when he blows the whistle.

Because la is a causative verb meaning “to let/have someone do something,” and the “someone” is a direct object. Therefore you need the object pronoun oss (us), not the subject pronoun vi (we). The subject of the clause is Treneren. Examples:

Jeg lar deg komme. (I let you come.)
Treneren lar dem spille. (The coach lets them play.)

Why is there no å before spille after lar?

After la you use the bare infinitive (no å), just like after modal verbs. So it’s lar oss spille, not lar oss å spille. Compare:

Han lar oss fortsette å spille. (Here fortsette governs å spille, but lar still takes a bare infinitive: fortsette, not å fortsette.)

What exactly does spille videre mean, and can I say fortsette å spille instead?

Spille videre means “continue/keep playing” (carry on from now). Fortsette å spille is also correct and a bit more neutral/formal. With la, both work:

Treneren lar oss spille videre.
Treneren lar oss fortsette å spille. Nuance: spille videre is concise and common in speech; fortsette å spille explicitly highlights the continuation.

What does derimot do here, and how is it different from men or imidlertid?

Derimot is a contrastive adverb meaning “on the other hand/however.” It typically starts a new main clause and, when placed first, triggers inversion (verb in second position: Derimot må vi…).

Men is a coordinating conjunction (“but”) that links two main clauses: …, men vi må … (no special inversion triggered by men; normal subject–verb order follows).
Imidlertid (“however”) is another contrastive adverb. Like derimot, it can go first with inversion (Imidlertid må vi…) or after the subject (Vi må imidlertid…).

Why is it derimot må vi and not derimot vi må?

Norwegian main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb must be in second position. When you front an adverbial like derimot, the verb comes next and the subject follows: [Derimot] [må] [vi] [stå stille] ….

Is the comma before derimot correct?

Stylistically, it’s better to separate two independent clauses joined only by derimot with a semicolon, dash, or period:

Treneren lar oss spille videre; derimot må vi stå stille når han blåser.
Treneren lar oss spille videre. Derimot må vi stå stille når han blåser. Using a comma alone here is common in informal writing but not recommended in formal text. If you use men, a comma is the standard linker: …, men vi må ….

Why is når used and not da?

Use når for present/future time and for repeated or general situations (“whenever/when”). Use da for a single, specific event in the past.

Når han blåser, må vi stå stille. (whenever/when he blows)
Da han blåste, måtte vi stå stille. (on that occasion in the past)

Why is han blåser in the present if it’s about a future/conditional time?

In Norwegian, subordinate time clauses often use the present to refer to future situations: når han blåser can mean “when he blows (in the future/whenever).” This is normal and does not require a future tense form.

Does blåser imply a whistle here? Should it be blåser i fløyta?

In sports contexts, blåse often implies “blow the whistle” even without an object, so han blåser is understood. To be explicit, you can say blåser i fløyta/fløyten or blåser i dommerfløyta.

Why say stå stille instead of stoppe?

Stå stille means “stand still, be motionless,” which fits an instruction to freeze. Stoppe focuses on the act of stopping an activity or movement, not necessarily remaining motionless. If you meant “stop playing,” you’d typically say slutte å spille, not stoppe å spille. Alternatives for “stand still” include stå rolig and holde oss i ro.

What’s the difference between stille and rolig here?

Both can modify stå, but they differ in nuance:

Stå stille = stand still (no movement).
Stå rolig = stand calmly (focus on calmness; slight movement isn’t excluded).
For a “freeze” instruction, stå stille is the standard.

Can derimot appear later in the clause, e.g., Vi må derimot stå stille?

Yes. Vi må derimot stå stille … is common and natural. Placing derimot initially (Derimot må vi …) adds a bit more contrastive emphasis and a slightly more formal/written tone.

Could I just use men instead of derimot?

Yes: Treneren lar oss spille videre, men vi må stå stille når han blåser.
This is perfectly natural. Men is simpler and more neutral; derimot is a bit more formal/contrastive and often works well at the start of a sentence or after a semicolon.

Is a comma needed after Når han blåser if I front that clause?

Yes, the standard is to put a comma after a fronted subordinate clause: Når han blåser, må vi stå stille. Leaving it out is common informally, but the comma is the norm.

How is la conjugated, and is this the same la as in La oss … (“Let’s …”)?

Conjugation of la: å la – lar – lot – har latt.

Han lar oss spille. (present)
Han lot oss spille. (preterite)
Han har latt oss spille. (perfect)
The “Let’s …” construction uses the imperative La: La oss spille. Don’t confuse lar (present, 3rd person) with imperative La.

Are there other verbs that take a bare infinitive like la?

Yes. The modal verbs kan, vil, skal, må, bør, tør take a bare infinitive: vi må stå, vi kan spille. Perception verbs like se, høre, kjenne also often take a bare infinitive: Jeg hørte han blåse. Note that some verbs (e.g., fortsette) require å before the next verb: fortsette å spille.

Why han and not ham?

Han is the subject form (nominative), and ham is the object form. In når han blåser, han is the subject of the subordinate clause, so han is correct. If it were an object, you’d use ham (though using han as an object is also common in modern Bokmål speech).