Breakdown of Det som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet, er at det er billigere i framtiden.
Questions & Answers about Det som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet, er at det er billigere i framtiden.
Det som … here means roughly “what …” in English.
- Det is a dummy pronoun that is then “explained” by the following som‑clause.
- som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet is a relative clause describing det.
So:
- Det som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet
≈ “What is nice about the new mobile plan”
The full structure Det som …, er at … is a very common pattern meaning:
What is X about A is that B.
Det som er X med A, er at B.
Example:
- Det som er bra med denne byen, er at den er stille.
“What is good about this town is that it is quiet.”
You cannot start a sentence with Som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet; it would be ungrammatical.
Functions:
- det is the “head” of the phrase and acts as the subject of the whole main clause.
- som is the relative pronoun linking the subject (det) to the relative clause (er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet).
Together:
- Det (that/what)
- som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet (which is nice about the new subscription)
Norwegian needs that det to anchor the relative clause. You cannot drop it in this construction.
som is a relative pronoun, similar to English that or which:
- det som er fint
“that which is nice / what is nice”
Key points:
- It refers back to det.
- It introduces the relative clause.
- Unlike English that, som usually cannot be omitted here.
You must say det som er fint, not det er fint if you want the “what is nice (about …)” meaning.
The comma separates a long subject clause from the main verb:
- Subject clause: Det som er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet
- Verb and rest: er at det er billigere i framtiden.
Norwegian often uses a comma before the verb when the subject is a full clause, especially when it is long, to make the sentence easier to read.
Without the comma it would still be understandable, but the comma is normal and stylistically preferred here.
mobilabonnementet is a compound noun:
- mobil = mobile (phone)
- abonnement = subscription
- mobilabonnement = mobile subscription / mobile plan
- mobilabonnementet = the mobile subscription / the mobile plan
Grammar details:
- abonnement is a neuter noun: et abonnement (a subscription), abonnementet (the subscription).
- When you make a compound, the gender stays the same:
- et mobilabonnement = a mobile plan
- mobilabonnementet = the mobile plan
The ‑et at the end is the neuter definite singular ending: et … – …et.
Two things are happening: gender and adjective agreement.
Gender of mobilabonnement
- mobilabonnement is neuter: et mobilabonnement.
- Definite form: mobilabonnementet.
- Therefore the definite article must be neuter: det (not den).
Adjective in definite form
- Base adjective: ny (new).
- Indefinite:
- en ny bil (a new car, masculine)
- ei ny bok (a new book, feminine)
- et nytt hus (a new house, neuter)
- Definite:
- den nye bilen
- det nye huset
- det nye mobilabonnementet
So det nye mobilabonnementet = “the new mobile plan” is the correct definite neuter phrase.
det ny mobilabonnementet is wrong because the adjective needs the ‑e in definite form.
Using the definite form implies that the speaker and listener both know which subscription is being talked about:
- det nye mobilabonnementet = “the new mobile subscription (that we have already mentioned / chosen / know about)”.
If you said:
- et nytt mobilabonnement = “a new mobile subscription”
you’d be presenting it as something not yet specified or not previously known.
In many real contexts, there is a specific new plan the speaker just switched to or was told about, so the definite form makes sense: they are talking about that particular new plan.
The pattern er at … is part of this specific construction:
- Det som er fint med X, er at Y.
“What is nice about X is that Y.”
Here at introduces a content clause (a “that‑clause”), not a reason clause:
- er at det er billigere i framtiden
= “is that it is cheaper in the future”
If you used fordi, that would introduce a reason:
- Det er fint med det nye mobilabonnementet fordi det er billigere i framtiden.
“The new mobile subscription is nice because it is cheaper in the future.”
Both are correct Norwegian, but they are different sentence structures with slightly different emphasis. The original focuses on “what is nice is that …”, while the fordi‑version is a simple main clause plus a reason.
Norwegian often uses the present tense to talk about the future, especially for general statements, plans, or predictable developments:
- Jeg reiser til Oslo i morgen.
“I am going to Oslo tomorrow.” - Butikken stenger klokka åtte.
“The store closes at eight.”
So:
- det er billigere i framtiden
literally “it is cheaper in the future”
but understood as “it will be cheaper in the future.”
You can say det vil være billigere i framtiden, but that sounds a bit more formal or heavy. The present tense is more natural in everyday speech here.
billigere is the comparative form of the adjective billig (cheap):
- billig = cheap
- billigere = cheaper
- billigst = cheapest
Norwegian normally forms the comparative of regular adjectives with ‑ere and the superlative with ‑est:
- dyr – dyrere – dyrest (expensive – more expensive – most expensive)
- rask – raskere – raskest (fast – faster – fastest)
So det er billigere i framtiden = “it is cheaper in the future.”
i framtiden means “in the future.”
- framtid = future (indefinite)
- framtiden = the future (definite)
Norwegian often uses the definite form for generic expressions like this:
- i framtiden / i fremtiden = in the future
- i helgen = on the weekend
- på morgenen = in the morning
As for spelling:
- framtid and fremtid are two accepted spellings of the same word.
- framtid is more in line with modern Bokmål reforms and is closer to spoken forms for many speakers.
- fremtid is more traditional.
Meaning and usage are the same; it is a stylistic / orthographic choice.