Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Nå skriver hun korte dikt i dagboken, men før likte hun best å lese en tykk bok. - Now she writes short poems in the diary, but before she liked best to read a thick book.

Norwegian main clauses follow the V2 rule (verb-second word order): the finite verb (here skriver) must be in the second position, no matter what comes first.

Nå skriver hun korte dikt…
1st element: Nå (time adverb)
2nd element: skriver (finite verb)
3rd element: hun (subject)

If you start with the subject instead, the order changes:

Hun skriver nå korte dikt…
1st: Hun
2nd: skriver
3rd: nå

But in both cases, the verb is second in the clause. This is normal and required in Norwegian main clauses, unlike in English.

Could I say Hun skriver nå korte dikt i dagboken instead of Nå skriver hun korte dikt i dagboken? Is there any difference?

Yes, you can say Hun skriver nå korte dikt i dagboken, and it’s grammatically correct.

The difference is mainly in emphasis:

Nå skriver hun korte dikt…
Emphasizes the time change: “Now (as opposed to before) she writes short poems…”
Hun skriver nå korte dikt…
Emphasizes her and what she’s doing, with nå just giving the time frame.

Both are natural; the original sentence highlights the contrast with før (“before”) more strongly.

What exactly does nå mean here? Is it “right now” or “these days”?

Nå can mean both, depending on context:

Right now / at this moment:
Nå skriver hun = “She is writing now (at this exact moment).”
Nowadays / these days / in the present period (often when contrasted with the past):
In your sentence, with men før (“but before”), nå is best understood as “nowadays / these days / in the present period of her life”, not just this exact second.

So context decides whether nå is more “now” or “these days”. Here it’s clearly a contrast in periods of time: nowadays vs before.

Why is it korte dikt and not kort dikt?

Because dikt is plural in this sentence.

kort dikt = “a short poem” (singular, indefinite)
korte dikt = “short poems” (plural)

In Norwegian, most adjectives add -e in the plural, regardless of gender:

et kort dikt – “a short poem” (singular, neuter)
korte dikt – “short poems” (plural)

So korte is the plural form of kort here.

But I thought dikt was neuter. Why doesn’t it show a plural ending, like dikter?

You’re right that dikt is neuter, and you’ve noticed a common pattern:

dikt is one of many neuter nouns where singular and plural look the same in the indefinite form.

Indefinite:

et dikt – “a poem”
dikt – “poems”

Definite:

diktet – “the poem”
diktene – “the poems”

So in korte dikt, only the adjective shows that it’s plural (korte), while the noun dikt keeps the same form.

Why is it i dagboken and not i dagbok?

The preposition i (“in”) is followed by the definite form here because we’re talking about a specific diary, “her diary”.

en dagbok – “a diary” (indefinite)
dagboken – “the diary” (definite, common gender)

With a preposition, you often specify a known, concrete thing, so Norwegian tends to use the definite form:

i bilen – in the car
på bordet – on the table
i dagboken – in the diary

So i dagboken = “in the diary (she has)” → “in her diary” in natural English.

Is dagbok masculine or feminine? Why is the ending -en and not -a?

The noun dagbok is historically feminine (ei dagbok), but in Bokmål many feminine nouns can also be treated as common gender (en).

Both are possible in standard Bokmål:

Feminine pattern:
- ei dagbok – a diary
- dagboka – the diary
Common gender pattern:
- en dagbok – a diary
- dagboken – the diary

Your sentence uses the common gender pattern (dagboken). This is very common in written Bokmål. Using dagboka would also be correct, just slightly more “feminine-leaning” style.

Why is it men før likte hun best and not men før hun likte best?

Because of the same V2 rule as earlier: in Norwegian main clauses, the finite verb must be in second position.

In men før likte hun best…:

1st element: før (time adverb)
2nd element: likte (verb)
3rd element: hun (subject)

So før likte hun is correct V2 word order.

Men før hun likte best å lese… would sound wrong in Norwegian as a main clause. That word order (subject before verb after an adverb) belongs in subordinate clauses, for example:

…fordi hun før likte best å lese…
(“…because she used to prefer reading before…”)

What does før mean here? Is it “before” or “earlier” or “used to”?

Før is an adverb of time meaning “before / earlier / previously”. It doesn’t itself mean “used to” grammatically, but in context it plays that role.

nå – now (these days)
før – before (in the past)

Combining før with a past tense verb (likte) gives the idea of a past habit:

Før likte hun best å lese…
= “Before/earlier, she preferred to read…”

In English we might naturally translate that as “she used to like best to read…”, but grammatically in Norwegian it’s just før + past tense, not a special “used to” form.

Why is the verb likte in the past tense while skriver is in the present?

The tenses reflect two different time periods:

Nå skriver hun…
Present tense (skriver) = what she does now / nowadays.
men før likte hun best å lese…
Past tense (likte) = what she preferred in the past.

So the sentence is contrasting present habits with past habits:

Now: she writes short poems in her diary.
Before: she preferred to read a thick book.

Using present in the first clause and past in the second is exactly what creates that contrast in time.

What is the function of best in likte hun best å lese?

Best is the superlative of godt (“well”) and bra (“good”). Here it’s an adverb modifying the verb likte (“liked”).

liker – likes
liker godt – likes a lot
liker best – likes best / prefers

So likte hun best å lese ≈ “she liked best to read” / “she liked reading the most” / “she preferred reading”.

Best here answers the question “how much, compared to other things?” → most.

Why do we need å before lese? Could I just say likte hun best lese en tykk bok?

You need å because lese is an infinitive verb here.

In Norwegian, when one verb governs another verb in the infinitive, you usually use å + infinitive:

å lese – to read
å skrive – to write
å se – to see

So:

likte hun best å lese en tykk bok = “she liked best to read a thick book”

Leaving out å (likte hun best lese…) is ungrammatical in standard Norwegian in this structure.

What’s the difference between en tykk bok and en stor bok?

Both tykk and stor describe something physically large, but they focus on different dimensions:

tykk bok – a thick book (many pages / a big spine)
stor bok – a large/big book (can refer to overall size: height/width, or just “big” generally)

In this context, en tykk bok suggests a book with lots of content / many pages, which makes sense when talking about reading habits.

Why is it tykk and not tykke in en tykk bok, while we had korte in korte dikt?

Adjective endings depend on number, gender and definiteness.

Singular, indefinite, common gender (en-words):
Adjective is normally in its basic form, without -e:
- en tykk bok – a thick book
- en kort film – a short movie
Plural (all genders):
Adjective usually takes -e:
- tykke bøker – thick books
- korte dikt – short poems

So:

en tykk bok – singular, indefinite → basic form tykk
korte dikt – plural → plural form korte

I’ve seen both tykk and tjukk. Which one is correct?

Both are correct; they are variants of the same word:

tykk – more common in written Bokmål, slightly more “standard/formal”
tjukk – also allowed in Bokmål, more colloquial and very common in speech

Meaning-wise, they are the same: thick (for objects) or fat (for people/animals, though that can be rude).

In your sentence, you could say either:

en tykk bok (most typical in writing)
en tjukk bok (also fine; sounds slightly more informal)

Why is there a comma before men?

In Norwegian, you normally put a comma before conjunctions that connect two main clauses, such as men (but), og (and), eller (or), for, så:

Your sentence has two full main clauses:

Nå skriver hun korte dikt i dagboken
før likte hun best å lese en tykk bok

They are linked by men, so we write:

Nå skriver hun korte dikt i dagboken, men før likte hun best å lese en tykk bok.

The comma marks the boundary between the two clauses.

Can I replace men før with something else, like mens før or men tidligere?

You can make some changes, but not all combinations are natural.

men før – very natural: “but before / but earlier” (clear contrast in time)
men tidligere – also natural, a bit more formal:
Nå skriver hun…, men tidligere likte hun best å lese…
mens før – sounds wrong here.
Mens usually means “while / whereas” and isn’t combined with før like that.

Better alternatives for the contrast:

Nå skriver hun …, men tidligere likte hun best å lese …
Nå skriver hun …, tidligere likte hun best å lese … (without men, just a contrast by time adverbs)

But men før is the simplest and most natural in this exact sentence.