Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Etter lunsj går vi innover i skogen. - After lunch we walk inward into the forest.

Norwegian main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb must be in second position. When you front a time expression like Etter lunsj, it takes the first slot, so the verb går comes second, and the subject vi comes third: Etter lunsj går vi …. Without fronting, it would be Vi går ….

Can the present tense går mean a future plan (“will go”)?

Yes. Norwegian often uses the simple present for scheduled or planned future actions: Etter lunsj går vi … = “We’ll go after lunch.” You can also say Etter lunsj skal vi gå … to emphasize intention/plan, or … kommer til å gå … for a more neutral prediction.

Do I need a comma after “Etter lunsj”?

No. In standard Norwegian, you normally don’t put a comma after short fronted adverbials like Etter lunsj.

Why is there no article with lunsj?

Meals typically take no article in a general sense: til lunsj, etter lunsj, under middag. You use the definite form if you mean a specific meal: etter lunsjen (vi hadde på kontoret).

Why is it skogen (definite) and not just skog?

Norwegian often uses the definite form for a specific, contextually known place: i skogen ≈ “in the (local/that) forest/woods.” The bare i skog is rare and feels generic or idiomatic only in set expressions.

What’s the difference between inn, inne, and innover?

inn = movement to the inside (“in, into”): gå inn i huset.
inne = being inside (static): vi er inne.
innover = movement further inward/deeper from a starting point: gå innover i skogen (“go deeper into the forest”).

Is innover i skogen redundant? Isn’t innover already “inward”?

It’s natural, not redundant. Innover describes the direction (“further in”), and i skogen names the space you’re moving within. Together they mean “go further into the forest (from the edge/inside).”

Could I say inn i skogen instead of innover i skogen?

Yes. inn i skogen focuses on entering the forest (crossing the boundary). innover i skogen emphasizes proceeding deeper inside, not just stepping across the edge.

Why is it i skogen and not til skogen?

Use i when you mean going into/being inside an area: inn i / i skogen. til skogen means “to the forest (area/edge)” and doesn’t necessarily imply entering it. If you want to stress entering, use inn i.

Can I move the time phrase to the end: Vi går innover i skogen etter lunsj?

Yes. That’s fine and quite natural. Just keep V2 if you front anything: Etter lunsj går vi …; otherwise Vi går … etter lunsj.

Where does ikke go?

In a main clause, ikke comes after the finite verb and subject: Etter lunsj går vi ikke innover i skogen. Without fronting: Vi går ikke innover i skogen etter lunsj.

How do you pronounce the tricky bits?

går: long å, roughly “gohr” [ɡoːr].
lunsj: the sj-sound [ʂ] at the end: [lʉnʂ].
skogen: sk = [sk] (not “sh”), [ˈskuːɡən].
innover: stress on the first syllable: [ˈɪnːɔvər].
Dialects vary with r (rolled or uvular), but all are fine.

Why is it spelled lunsj and not “lunch”?

Norwegian uses the adapted spelling lunsj. You’ll see “lunch” on signs/menus sometimes, but lunsj is the standard.

What’s the nuance between gå, dra, and reise?

gå = “walk” or sometimes just “go/leave” on foot; with a destination it often implies walking: gå innover i skogen.
dra = “go/leave” by any means, neutral about transport: dra til skogen.
reise = “travel,” usually longer/formal trips.

Could Etter lunsj går vi … mean “we leave after lunch”?

Yes, if there’s no destination/complement, gå can mean “leave”: Etter lunsj går vi. In your sentence, the complement innover i skogen makes it “walk/go further into the forest.”

How do you conjugate gå?

Principal parts: å gå – går – gikk – har gått.
Examples: Vi går nå. / I går gikk vi. / Vi har gått langt.

What’s the difference between etter, etterpå, and etter at?

etter + noun: etter lunsj (“after lunch”).
etterpå: “afterwards” (no object): Vi går etterpå.
etter at + clause: etter at vi har spist (lunsj) (“after we have eaten”).