Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Min yngre bror sier at hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen. - My younger brother says that his dream job is to work with animals in the forest.

In Norwegian, you normally do not use the definite form (with -en / -a / -et) when the noun already has a possessive word like min, din, hans, etc.

So:

Min yngre bror = my younger brother ✅
Yngre broren min = the younger brother of mine ✅ (possessive after the noun)
Min yngre broren ❌ (double definiteness – possessive + definite ending)

You either mark possession before the noun (min bror) or use the definite form + possessive after the noun (broren min), but you don’t combine min + broren together in front.

What is the difference between yngre bror and lillebror?

Both can often be translated as “younger brother”, but they aren’t identical:

yngre bror = literally “younger brother” (comparative of ung = young).
- Neutral, just says he is younger than you.
lillebror = “little brother” (a compound noun).
- More like a fixed family term, often used the same way English uses “little brother”.
- Slightly more affectionate / everyday.

Examples:

Min yngre bror bor i Oslo. = My younger brother lives in Oslo.
Lillebroren min bor i Oslo. = My little brother lives in Oslo.

In many contexts you could say Min lillebror sier at … instead of Min yngre bror sier at ….

Why is it yngre and not mer ung?

Norwegian, like English, has irregular comparatives for some adjectives.

ung (young) → yngre (younger) → yngst (youngest)

You almost never say mer ung for “younger” in this sense; you use yngre.
Similarly:

gammel → eldre (older)
stor → større (bigger)

Why is it Min yngre bror sier at … and not Min yngre bror sier som …?

In this sentence, at introduces a subordinate clause (a “that”-clause):

Min yngre bror sier at … = My younger brother says that …

The conjunction at = that (not “at” in English!).

The word som usually means who/that/which in relative clauses:

Broren min, som bor i Oslo, sier … = My brother, who lives in Oslo, says …

So:

Use at to introduce what someone says, thinks, believes, etc.
Use som to introduce a clause that describes a noun (who/that/which).

Why is it hans drømmejobb and not sin drømmejobb?

Norwegian has two kinds of his/her:

sin / si / sitt / sine (reflexive possessive)
hans / hennes (non‑reflexive possessive)

sin refers back to the subject of the same clause.
In the sentence:

Min yngre bror sier at hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

The at‑clause is:
(at) hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

The subject of this clause is hans drømmejobb, not min yngre bror, so sin would grammatically refer back to drømmejobb, which makes no sense. Therefore, you must use hans here.

More natural Norwegian, though, would often be:

Min yngre bror sier at drømmejobben hans er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

Here drømmejobben hans clearly means his dream job (referring to him), but grammatically you still use hans, not sin, because the subject in that clause is drømmejobben.

Why is it hans drømmejobb instead of drømmejobben hans?

Both are grammatically correct, but they feel slightly different in style:

hans drømmejobb
- Possessive before the noun.
- Often a bit more formal/literary or emphatic: his dream job (as opposed to someone else’s).
drømmejobben hans
- Possessive after the definite noun.
- This is the most natural, spoken way to say “his dream job”.

So a very natural version of the sentence is:

Min yngre bror sier at drømmejobben hans er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

Why is it drømmejobb and not drømmejobben, even though English has “his dream job” with “the”?

Norwegian and English treat definiteness a bit differently.

In Norwegian, when you talk about what something is by type, especially after er (“is”), you often use the indefinite form:

Jobben min er lærer. = My job is (being a) teacher.
Drømmen hans er å bli lege. = His dream is to become a doctor.
Hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr … = His dream job is to work with animals …

You could also say:

Drømmejobben hans er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

Here drømmejobben hans is definite and is also perfectly correct and very natural.
So both hans drømmejobb and drømmejobben hans work; the choice is more about style and word order than strict definiteness rules here.

What does å jobbe mean here, and could I use å arbeide instead?

Both å jobbe and å arbeide mean “to work”, but:

å jobbe
- More informal / everyday.
- Most common in spoken Norwegian.
å arbeide
- Slightly more formal or bookish.
- Also used in set phrases.

In this sentence:

… hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.

you could grammatically say:

… hans drømmejobb er å arbeide med dyr i skogen.

It would just sound a bit more formal. Å jobbe is the most natural choice here.

Why is it med dyr and not med dyrene or med noen dyr?

dyr = animals (indefinite plural)
dyrene = the animals (definite plural)

In English you say “to work with animals” when you mean animals in general. Norwegian often does the same: med dyr means with animals (in general).

If you say:

med dyrene = with the animals (some specific animals already known in context)
med noen dyr = with some animals (an unspecified but limited group)

So med dyr is the natural way to express the idea “with animals” as a general dream job.

Why is it i skogen and not i en skog?

i skogen = in the forest (definite)
i en skog = in a forest (indefinite)

Norwegian often uses the definite form when talking about nature areas in general, especially with i:

i skogen = in the woods / in the forest (as a general type of place)
på fjellet = in the mountains / on the mountain
ved sjøen = by the sea

So med dyr i skogen is naturally understood as “with animals in the forest/woods” (general), not one particular forest. i en skog would sound more like “in a (certain) forest” and is less idiomatic for describing a general dream job.

Why is the structure … er å jobbe … used? Could it be … er jobb med dyr …?

The pattern er å + infinitive is very common in Norwegian to express what something is (to do):

Målet mitt er å lære norsk. = My goal is to learn Norwegian.
Drømmen hennes er å reise verden rundt. = Her dream is to travel around the world.
Hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.
= His dream job is to work with animals in the forest.

You could say something like:

Hans drømmejobb er jobb med dyr i skogen. ❌ (sounds wrong/unnatural)
Hans drømmejobb er en jobb med dyr i skogen. ✅ (grammatical, but heavier and less elegant)

Using er å jobbe is smoother and the most idiomatic way to show what the job consists of.

Where would ikke go if I want to say “is not to work with animals in the forest”?

You place ikke after er (the conjugated verb) in this type of sentence:

Hans drømmejobb er ikke å jobbe med dyr i skogen.
= His dream job is not to work with animals in the forest.

General rule in main clauses:
Subject – verb – ikke – rest

Here:

Subject: hans drømmejobb
Verb: er
Negation: ikke
Rest: å jobbe med dyr i skogen

Why is it Min yngre bror sier and not Min yngre bror sier det at?

You can say sier det at, but it’s usually unnecessary and more wordy.

Min yngre bror sier at … = My younger brother says that … (natural)
Min yngre bror sier det at … = also possible, but sounds heavier / more emphatic.

Norwegian typically omits det in such constructions and just uses sier at + clause.

Could I change the word order to put the “says” part at the end, like in English: “..., says my younger brother”?

Yes. Norwegian allows that kind of inversion for stylistic reasons:

Min yngre bror sier at hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen.
Hans drømmejobb er å jobbe med dyr i skogen, sier min yngre bror.

Both are correct. The second version puts more emphasis on what the dream job is, then adds “says my younger brother” afterwards, similar to English.