Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Ordføreren i kommunen vår minner oss om at det er en plikt å stemme ved valg. - The mayor in our municipality reminds us that it is a duty to vote in elections.

Here we are talking about the specific mayor of our municipality, a person that both speaker and listener can identify. Because it’s specific and unique in this context, Norwegian uses the definite form: ordføreren.

What does i kommunen vår mean literally, and why is the possessive placed after the noun?

Literally:

i = in
kommunen = the municipality
vår = our

So i kommunen vår is literally “in the municipality our”, which corresponds to “in our municipality” in English.

Norwegian has two main patterns with possessives:

Noun + definite ending + possessive after the noun
- kommunen vår = our municipality
- huset mitt = my house
- boka di = your book
Possessive before the noun (usually no definite ending)
- vår kommune = our municipality
- mitt hus = my house
- din bok = your book

Both kommunen vår and vår kommune are grammatically correct, but:

kommunen vår (postposed possessive) is very common and often sounds more neutral and natural in everyday speech.
vår kommune can sound a bit more formal or emphatic, sometimes stressing “our”.

In this sentence, i kommunen vår is the most natural, idiomatic choice.

Is there a difference between ordfører and borgermester?

Yes.

ordfører is the normal modern Norwegian word for the mayor of a municipality.
borgermester is old-fashioned, and today it’s mostly:
- historical/archaic,
- used in some fixed expressions,
- or seen in Danish/German contexts.

So if you mean the current mayor of a Norwegian kommune, ordfører is the word you should use.

How does the verb å minne work in this sentence?

The verb å minne means “to remind”.

Its typical pattern is:

minne noen om noe
remind someone of/about something

Breakdown in the sentence:

minner = reminds
oss = us (object pronoun)
om = of/about
at det er en plikt å stemme ved valg = that it is a duty to vote in elections (a clause functioning as “the thing” we’re reminded of)

So the structure is:

minner oss om [at‑clause]
reminds us of/about [that‑clause]

Compare:

Hun minner meg om avtalen. = She reminds me of the agreement.
Læreren minner dem om at de må gjøre leksene. = The teacher reminds them that they must do the homework.

In all these, minne + noen + om + noe is the core pattern.

Why do we say minner oss om at and not just minner oss at?

Because om is required by the verb å minne in this meaning.

The construction is:

minne noen om noe = remind someone of/about something

When the “something” is a clause starting with at (“that”), it still follows om:

minner oss om at det er en plikt
reminds us of/about the fact that it is a duty

You cannot drop om here:

❌ minner oss at det er en plikt (incorrect)
✅ minner oss om at det er en plikt (correct)

Note: Norwegian also has minne noen på noe, which often means “remind someone to do something” (more about a future action):

Kan du minne meg på å ringe henne?
= Can you remind me to call her?

Here, with a statement (“it is a duty…”), minne om at is the correct one.

What is the function of det in det er en plikt å stemme?

Here det is a dummy (expletive) subject, similar to “it” in English sentences like:

It is important to vote.

Norwegian often uses this pattern:

Det er + adjective/noun + å + verb
It is + adjective/noun + to + verb

Examples:

Det er vanskelig å lære norsk.
It is hard to learn Norwegian.
Det er lurt å spare penger.
It is wise to save money.
Det er en plikt å stemme ved valg.
It is a duty to vote in elections.

So det doesn’t refer to anything concrete; it just fills the subject position.

Could we say “Å stemme er en plikt” instead of “Det er en plikt å stemme”? Is there a difference?

Yes, you can say both, and both are grammatically correct.

Det er en plikt å stemme.
Very natural, neutral statement: “It is a duty to vote.”
Common pattern with dummy det
- å + verb at the end.
Å stemme er en plikt.
Literally: “To vote is a duty.”
This puts a bit more emphasis on the action “to vote” at the start of the sentence. It can sound slightly more formal or emphatic.

In everyday speech and writing, Det er en plikt å stemme is more typical.

How is å stemme used in Norwegian? Does it need an object?

In this context, å stemme means “to vote” and is used without a direct object:

å stemme ved valg = to vote in elections

Common patterns:

å stemme = to vote (in general)
- Jeg stemmer hver gang. = I vote every time.
å stemme ved valg = to vote at/in an election
- Det er viktig å stemme ved valg.
å stemme på noe/noen = to vote for something/someone
- Jeg stemmer på Arbeiderpartiet. = I vote for the Labour Party.
- Hun stemte på ham. = She voted for him.

Note that å stemme also has other meanings (e.g. “to be correct” or “to tune” an instrument), but in this sentence it clearly means “to vote”.

What does en plikt mean, and how is it different from et ansvar?

en plikt = a duty, an obligation
Something you are required (legally, morally, or socially) to do.
et ansvar = a responsibility
A broader sense of being responsible for something, but not always a strict “duty”.

In det er en plikt å stemme, plikt emphasizes that voting is something you ought to do – a moral or civic obligation.

Compare:

Foreldre har ansvar for barna sine.
Parents have responsibility for their children.
Det er plikt til å møte opp i retten.
It is a duty / you are obligated to appear in court.

You could say det er et ansvar å stemme, but it shifts the nuance slightly: more about having responsibility, less about a formal duty. Plikt is the stronger word for “obligation” here.

Why is valg used without an article in ved valg, and why ved and not i?

Valg = election (singular) or elections (context-dependent).

In ved valg, it’s used indefinitely and without an article to mean “at elections / in elections in general”, not one specific election:

ved valg = at elections (in general)
ved valget = at the election (a specific one already known)

So:

å stemme ved valg = to vote at elections (as a general practice).

About the preposition:

ved often means “by, at, during (an event)”.
- ved middagen = at the dinner
- ved eksamen = during/at the exam
- ved valg = at elections

Using i valg would sound wrong in this context. I (“in”) doesn’t fit naturally with valg when you mean “at the time of an election”.

So the idiomatic expression is å stemme ved valg.

Why is the word order “minner oss om at det er en plikt å stemme …” and not something else? How does word order work here?

The sentence has:

A main clause (hovedsetning):
- Ordføreren i kommunen vår minner oss om
  Subject (ordføreren ...) + verb (minner) in second position (Norwegian V2 rule).
Followed by a subordinate clause (leddsetning) introduced by at:
- at det er en plikt å stemme ved valg

In Norwegian:

In main clauses, the finite verb usually comes in second position:
- Ordføreren (1) minner (2) oss om …
In subordinate clauses introduced by at, the order is:
- Subject – verb – (rest), with no V2 inversion:
- at det (subject) er (verb) en plikt å stemme ved valg

So the structure is:

[Main clause: V2] Ordføreren i kommunen vår minner oss om
[Subclause: subject–verb] at det er en plikt å stemme ved valg.

You can’t move er to second place after at, so forms like:

❌ at er det en plikt å stemme (wrong)

are ungrammatical. The correct is:

✅ at det er en plikt å stemme.