Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Vi finner fjernkontrollen til slutt, og de overlever selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter. - We find the remote control in the end, and of course they survive without TV for a few minutes.

In this sentence, we are talking about one specific remote that everyone already knows about (the one they’ve been looking for), so Norwegian uses the definite form fjernkontrollen.

If you said Vi finner en fjernkontroll, it would sound like we happen to find some remote (one of many), not the one we were after.

What is the difference between til slutt, endelig, and etter hvert?

All three can be translated as “finally / eventually” in some contexts, but they are not interchangeable:

til slutt
- Literal meaning: in the end / at the end (of a process or sequence)
- Neutral about feelings; focuses on the final point in time in a chain of events.
- Fits perfectly in this sentence: after searching or waiting, at the end they find the remote.
endelig
- Meaning: finally, at last
- Expresses emotion: relief, impatience satisfied.
- Vi finner endelig fjernkontrollen = We finally (at last!) find the remote. → implies you were annoyed or impatient.
etter hvert
- Meaning: eventually / after some time / gradually
- Often suggests something happening gradually or just at some (unspecified) later point.
- Vi finner fjernkontrollen etter hvert = We find the remote eventually / after a while (less of a clear “final step in a sequence”).

In the original sentence, til slutt works best because we’re talking about the last step in a small story.

Why is the verb in the present tense (finner) rather than the past (fant)?

Norwegian, like English, can use the present tense to tell a story or describe a typical/regular situation:

Vi finner fjernkontrollen til slutt …
= We (always / typically) end up finding the remote in the end…
or a kind of “narrative present”: telling it as if it’s happening right now.

If you wanted to talk about one specific event in the past, you would normally use the past tense:

Vi fant fjernkontrollen til slutt …
= We eventually found the remote…

So the present here can sound like:

a general pattern (this is what usually happens), or
a vivid, story‑telling style (like English: So we look everywhere, and in the end we find it…).

Why is the word order “de overlever selvfølgelig” and not “de selvfølgelig overlever” or “selvfølgelig overlever de”?

Norwegian main clauses generally follow the V2 rule: the finite verb is in the second position, and many adverbs (like selvfølgelig) come after that verb:

Subject first: De
Verb second: overlever
Then adverb: selvfølgelig

So the default neutral order is:

De overlever selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter.

Other orders are possible but change emphasis:

Selvfølgelig overlever de uten TV …
- Here selvfølgelig is in first position.
- This strongly emphasizes of course; almost like: Of course they survive…
De selvfølgelig overlever uten TV …
- This is unnatural in standard Norwegian; it breaks the usual verb–adverb order in main clauses.

So the sentence uses the most normal, neutral word order: subject – verb – adverb.

Why is it uten TV and not uten en TV or uten TV-en?

Norwegian often drops the article for things that are seen as activities, media, or abstract concepts:

uten TV = without television (as a medium / activity)
→ Focus is on watching TV in general, not on a physical device.

Compare:

uten en TV
- without a TV set (any one TV).
- More concrete: e.g. A hotel room without a TV is boring.
uten TV-en
- without the TV (set) = the specific TV set everyone knows about.
- E.g. Vi flytter TV-en ut av stua. Barna må klare seg uten TV-en.
  (We move the TV out of the living room. The kids have to manage without the TV.)

In this sentence, the point is “they survive without watching television”, so uten TV (no article) is natural.

What does i noen minutter literally mean, and why is i used here?

i noen minutter literally means “for some minutes / for a few minutes”.

Here, i is a common preposition to express duration:

i to timer = for two hours
i tre dager = for three days
i noen minutter = for a few minutes

Possible contrasts:

i noen minutter – neutral duration: they are without TV for that length of time.
noen minutter (without i) – sometimes possible in speech, but i is more standard here.
for noen minutter siden – means “a few minutes ago” (time before now, not duration).
på noen minutter – usually means in a few minutes (it will be done within that time), expressing how long it takes to complete something.

So i in i noen minutter is the standard way to say “for (the duration of) a few minutes”.

What is the difference between noen and noe, and why is it noen minutter here?

Both mean “some / any”, but they are used with different kinds of nouns:

noen
- used with plural countable nouns
- noen minutter = some minutes / a few minutes
- noen bøker = some books
noe
- used with uncountable / mass nouns or on its own
- noe vann = some water
- noe melk = some milk
- Er det noe galt? = Is there something wrong?

Since minutter is a plural countable noun, you must use noen minutter, not noe minutter.

Why is there a comma before og in this sentence?

The sentence is:

Vi finner fjernkontrollen til slutt, og de overlever selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter.

Norwegian normally uses a comma between two main clauses that each have their own subject and verb:

Clause 1: Vi finner fjernkontrollen til slutt
- subject: vi
- verb: finner
Clause 2: de overlever selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter
- subject: de
- verb: overlever

Because these are two independent clauses joined by og, a comma is standard:

[Main clause 1], og [Main clause 2].

If it were a shared subject with one verb phrase, there might be no comma, e.g.:

Vi finner fjernkontrollen og legger den på bordet.
(Same subject vi, two verbs finner and legger in one combined predicate.)

Why use overlever (“survive”) here? Could you also say klarer seg or greier seg?

Overlever literally means “survive”, but it’s often used a bit humorously or dramatically, just like in English:

They survive without TV for a few minutes
→ Makes it sound exaggerated, playful: as if it were a big hardship.

Alternatives:

De klarer seg selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter.
De greier seg selvfølgelig uten TV i noen minutter.

Both klarer seg and greier seg mean roughly “manage / cope / get by” and sound a bit more neutral, less dramatic.

So:

overlever – playful, dramatic survive
klarer seg / greier seg – more neutral manage / cope

All are grammatically fine; the original just has a more humorous tone.

Are selvfølgelig, selvsagt, and naturligvis interchangeable here?

They are very close in meaning and would all fit here, with only slight differences in tone:

selvfølgelig
- Very common, neutral “of course”.
- Works perfectly: De overlever selvfølgelig uten TV …
selvsagt
- Also “of course / obviously”.
- Sometimes feels a bit more emphatic or slightly more formal/old‑fashioned in some contexts, but still very common.
- De overlever selvsagt uten TV …
naturligvis
- “naturally, of course”.
- Can sound a touch more formal or stylistic.
- De overlever naturligvis uten TV …

In everyday speech, selvfølgelig is the most frequent choice, but using selvsagt or naturligvis here would still be completely correct and natural.