De fleste av innvandrerne kjenner til grunnloven, men noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.

Most of the immigrants know about the constitution, but some of the paragraphs are still difficult.

Breakdown of De fleste av innvandrerne kjenner til grunnloven, men noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.

• være: to be
• men: but
• fortsatt: still
• vanskelig: difficult
• av: of
• noen: some
• grunnloven: the constitution
• innvandreren: the immigrant
• de fleste: most
• kjenne til: to know about
• paragrafen: the paragraph

Questions & Answers about De fleste av innvandrerne kjenner til grunnloven, men noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.

What does “De fleste av innvandrerne” literally mean, and why is “av” used here?

Literally, “De fleste av innvandrerne” means “the most of the immigrants”, but natural English is “Most of the immigrants”.

• De fleste = most
• av = of
• innvandrerne = the immigrants (definite plural)

You use “de fleste av + definite plural” when you’re talking about a specific group:

• De fleste av innvandrerne = Most of the immigrants (in this particular group we’re talking about)

Compare:

• De fleste innvandrere (no av, indefinite noun)
  → Most immigrants (in general, as a group in society, not a specific set)

So “av” marks that we’re taking a subset of a specific, known group.

Why is it “innvandrerne” and not just “innvandrere”?

“Innvandrerne” is the definite plural form: the immigrants.

• en innvandrer = an immigrant
• innvandrere = immigrants
• innvandrerne = the immigrants

In “De fleste av innvandrerne”, using the definite form (innvandrerne) shows we mean a specific group of immigrants that both speaker and listener know about (for example, those in Norway, or those in a particular study).

If you drop the definite ending:

• De fleste innvandrere = Most immigrants (generally, as a category)

The original sentence is about a specific, known group, so it uses the definite form innvandrerne.

Why is it “kjenner til grunnloven” and not just “kjenner grunnloven” or “vet grunnloven”?

Norwegian distinguishes several verbs for “know”:

• vite = to know a fact
  
  • Jeg vet at grunnloven ble skrevet i 1814.
• kjenne = to know a person, place, or thing (personally / directly)
  
  • Jeg kjenner henne. = I know her.
  • Jeg kjenner Oslo godt. = I know Oslo well.
• kjenne til = to be familiar with / have heard of / know of
  
  • Jeg kjenner til saken. = I’m familiar with the case.

In “kjenner til grunnloven”, the meaning is:

are familiar with the constitution / know about the constitution

It doesn’t mean they know every detail by heart; just that they know of it and have some familiarity.

• “kjenner grunnloven” would sound like they know it very well, more personally/intimately.
• “vet grunnloven” is wrong; “vite” doesn’t take a direct object like that. You use “vite” with clauses:
  • De vet hva grunnloven er. = They know what the constitution is.

Why is “grunnloven” in the definite form?

“Grunnloven” is “the constitution” in the definite form:

• en grunnlov = a constitution
• grunnloven = the constitution

Here it refers specifically to Norway’s constitution, which is a unique, well-known document. Norwegian normally uses the definite for such things:

• kongen = the king (of Norway)
• stortinget = the parliament
• grunnloven = the constitution

In English we often capitalize and say “the Constitution” for a specific one. In Norwegian, it’s normally lowercase “grunnloven” unless part of a full official title (e.g. Grunnloven av 1814).

Why is “grunnloven” not capitalized like “Constitution” often is in English?

In Norwegian, only proper names are capitalized, not generic nouns, even when they refer to unique institutions or documents.

• grunnloven = the constitution (common noun)
• Constitution in English is often treated like a proper name and capitalized.

Norwegian would capitalize only if it’s part of an official name or title, e.g.:

• Grunnloven av 1814 (a formal, title-like use)

In ordinary sentences, you write “grunnloven” with a lowercase g.

What does “noen av paragrafene” mean exactly, and why is “paragrafene” definite here?

“noen av paragrafene” means “some of the sections/articles (of the law)”.

• noen = some
• av = of
• paragrafene = the sections / the articles (definite plural of en paragraf)

Structure: noen av + definite plural = some of the

You use the definite plural (paragrafene) because we’re referring to a specific, known set of paragraphs: the ones in this constitution.

Compare:

• noen paragrafer = some sections (in general; not tied to a specific document)
• noen av paragrafene (i grunnloven) = some of the sections (in the constitution)

What does “paragraf” mean here? It doesn’t look like the English “paragraph”.

Norwegian “paragraf” in legal contexts means:

• a section / article / clause of a law or legal document.

It does not just mean a standard text paragraph as in general writing. In a legal context like “grunnloven” (the constitution), “paragraf” is the standard term for an article of the law, often numbered.

So:

• noen av paragrafene ≈ some of the articles (in the constitution)

Why is the word order “er fortsatt vanskelige” and not “fortsatt er vanskelige”?

In a simple main clause with “er” as the verb, the normal word order is:

Subject – Verb – (Adverb) – Complement

So:

• noen av paragrafene (subject)
• er (verb)
• fortsatt (adverb: still)
• vanskelige (complement: adjective)

→ “noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.”

You can say “noen av paragrafene fortsatt er vanskelige”, but then it must be inside another clause, typically after something like:

• … at noen av paragrafene fortsatt er vanskelige.
  … that some of the sections are still difficult.

On its own as a main sentence, “Er noen av paragrafene fortsatt vanskelige” (question word order) or “Noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige” (statement word order) are correct. “Noen av paragrafene fortsatt er vanskelige.” by itself would be ungrammatical.

Why is the adjective “vanskelige” ending in -e and not “vanskelig”?

Adjectives in Norwegian agree with the noun they describe in number and definiteness.

Here, “vanskelige” is a predicative adjective describing “noen av paragrafene”:

• paragrafene = definite plural
• Adjectives referring to definite plural nouns take -e:
  • Paragrafene er vanskelige.
  • Disse paragrafene er vanskelige.

So we get:

• noen av paragrafene → plural, definite group
• er vanskelige → adjective with -e to match that plural group.

If it were singular:

• Paragrafen er vanskelig. = The section is difficult.
• Denne paragrafen er vanskelig.

What is the function of “men” in this sentence, and could you replace it with “og”?

“men” means “but” and introduces a contrast:

• De fleste av innvandrerne kjenner til grunnloven, men noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.
  → Most of the immigrants are familiar with the constitution, *but some of the articles are still difficult.*

It contrasts:

1. Positive / neutral: they know about the constitution.
2. Negative / limiting: some parts are still hard.

If you used “og” (= and), you would lose that contrast and just list two facts:

• … kjenner til grunnloven, og noen av paragrafene er fortsatt vanskelige.

This is grammatical, but sounds weaker and less natural here, because the intended meaning is a “yes, but…” contrast. That’s why “men” is preferred.