Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

I have a job interview tomorrow, and the application deadline was just one week ago.

Breakdown of Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

• jeg: I
• være: to be
• ha: to have
• og: and
• i morgen: tomorrow
• for: for
• uken: the week
• én: one
• bare: only
• jobbsamtalen: the job interview
• søknadsfristen: the application deadline
• siden: ago

Questions & Answers about Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

Why is har (present tense) used for something that will happen i morgen (tomorrow)? Shouldn’t it be skal ha?

Norwegian often uses the present tense (presens) to talk about the near future, especially when the event is planned or scheduled.

• Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen.
  = I’m having / I have a job interview tomorrow.

This feels very similar to English I have a job interview tomorrow, which is also present tense with future meaning.

You can say:

• Jeg skal ha jobbsamtale i morgen.

This is also correct. The nuance:

• Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen – very neutral, like a fixed plan on your calendar.
• Jeg skal ha jobbsamtale i morgen – slightly more focus on the intention/arrangement, but in everyday speech they are almost interchangeable here.

So the present tense for future is completely normal and very common in Norwegian.

Why is it har jobbsamtale and not har en jobbsamtale? Don’t we usually need en?

Both are actually possible:

• Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen.
• Jeg har en jobbsamtale i morgen.

Using no article here is quite natural in Norwegian with nouns that describe events, appointments, or activities, especially after ha:

• Jeg har møte klokka ti. (= I have a meeting at ten.)
• Jeg har eksamen neste uke. (= I have an exam next week.)
• Jeg har time hos legen. (= I have an appointment at the doctor’s.)

Adding en usually makes it a bit more “countable” or concrete (one specific interview), but in this context it doesn’t change the meaning much. Both forms sound normal; without the article is just a very typical pattern with these “event” nouns.

What is the difference between jobbsamtale and jobbintervju? Are both “job interview”?

Yes, both can mean “job interview”, but there is a nuance:

• jobbintervju – the most direct equivalent of English job interview. Very common.
• jobbsamtale – literally job conversation. Can sound a bit softer, sometimes used for a more informal, exploratory talk (but it can still be a regular job interview).

In practice, many people use them almost interchangeably. If you want the standard, unambiguous word, jobbintervju is the safest. Jobbsamtale might be used by employers who want it to sound less scary or more informal.

Why do we say i morgen and not something like på morgen or til morgen?

I morgen is a fixed expression meaning tomorrow, not literally “in the morning”.

• i dag – today
• i morgen – tomorrow
• i går – yesterday

So i morgen is just the standard phrase; you don’t change the preposition here.

If you want to talk about the time of day, you use other forms, for example:

• i morgen tidlig – tomorrow morning (early)
• i morgen ettermiddag – tomorrow afternoon
• i morgen kveld – tomorrow evening

But i morgen on its own always means tomorrow.

How is søknadsfristen built up, and why is there an s in the middle?

Søknadsfristen is a compound noun with a definite ending:

1. søknad – application
2. frist – deadline

They are combined into a compound:

• søknad
  • s
    • frist → søknadsfrist = application deadline

That linking s is very common in Norwegian compounds (it’s often called a linking s).

Then we add the definite singular ending -en:

• søknadsfrist
  • -en → søknadsfristen = the application deadline

So søknadsfristen literally means the application deadline.

Why is it søknadsfristen var (past tense) and not er when the deadline is already over?

Norwegian looks at this like English:

• The deadline was only one week ago.
• Søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

You talk about the deadline as something located in the past:

• It was at a certain point (one week ago).
• It’s not about whether the deadline is “valid” now, but when it took place.

So past tense var fits because you’re describing when the deadline occurred.

What does the structure for … siden mean in for bare én uke siden, and why do we need both for and siden?

The pattern for … siden is the standard way to say X time ago:

• for to dager siden – two days ago
• for én uke siden – one week ago
• for tre år siden – three years ago

You normally need both for and siden:

• ✗ en uke siden – incorrect on its own
• ✗ for en uke – means “for a week”, not “a week ago”

So for … siden frames the time expression (én uke) to mean “ago”.

In your sentence:

• for bare én uke siden = only one week ago

What exactly does bare do in for bare én uke siden? Could it go somewhere else?

Bare means only / just here, adding the idea that the time span is short:

• for én uke siden – one week ago
• for bare én uke siden – only one week ago

The typical place for bare is right before the thing it is limiting:

• bare én uke – only one week
• bare to dager – only two days

So for bare én uke siden is the most natural word order.

Other positions are either unusual or change the nuance. For example:

• for én uke bare siden – sounds wrong.
• bare for én uke siden – possible in some contexts, but here it usually sounds more natural after for: for bare én uke siden.

Why is it written én with an accent and not just en?

Norwegian uses en both as:

• the indefinite article: en = a / an
• the numeral: en = one

To avoid confusion or to emphasize “one (and not more)”, you can add an acute accent to the number:

• én = one (as a number, stressed)
• en = often the article, but can also be the number if context is clear

In for bare én uke siden, the writer wants to emphasize the idea that it was only one week ago. You could also write for bare en uke siden; it would still be understood as one week ago. The accent is optional, but it adds clarity and emphasis.

Why is there a comma before og in …, og søknadsfristen var …? In English we often skip the comma before “and”.

Norwegian comma rules differ from English.

In Norwegian, when og connects two main clauses (each with its own subject and verb), you normally put a comma before og:

1. Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen – main clause
2. søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden – main clause (different subject: søknadsfristen)

Because these are two independent main clauses with different subjects, you write:

• Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

If they shared the same subject and formed one combined clause, there would usually be no comma, e.g.:

• Jeg har jobb og studier.
• Jeg skal spise og drikke.

Could the time expression i morgen be moved, like Jeg har i morgen jobbsamtale, or does it have to be after jobbsamtale?

The most natural word order is:

• Jeg har jobbsamtale i morgen.

Putting i morgen earlier is possible but sounds marked or stiff in this short sentence:

• Jeg har i morgen jobbsamtale. – grammatically possible but unusual here.

General rule in neutral speech:

• Subject (Jeg) + verb (har) + object/complement (jobbsamtale) + time adverbial (i morgen).

However, if you really want to emphasize tomorrow, you could front it:

• I morgen har jeg jobbsamtale.

That is very natural and actually quite common when the time is what you want to highlight.

Could you say Jeg har jobbintervju i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden instead? Would anything change?

Yes, that sentence is fully correct:

• Jeg har jobbintervju i morgen, og søknadsfristen var for bare én uke siden.

The only change is the word jobbintervju instead of jobbsamtale. The meaning is essentially the same: you have a job interview tomorrow, and the application deadline was only one week ago. The grammar and structure of the sentence stay exactly the same.