Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Frisyren og sminken hennes ser helt annerledes ut enn i virkeligheten. - Her hairstyle and makeup look completely different than in reality.

Postposed (after the noun):
- frisyren hennes = her hairstyle
- sminken hennes = her makeup
- frisyren og sminken hennes = her hairstyle and (her) makeup
This is the most neutral, everyday pattern. When the possessive comes at the end of a coordinated phrase, it naturally refers to both nouns.
Preposed (before the noun):
- hennes frisyre og sminke
This is also correct, but it sounds a bit more formal and can give a slight emphasis on hennes (“her hairstyle and makeup” as opposed to someone else’s).

In this sentence, postposed “hennes” is chosen because:

It’s stylistically more neutral in spoken and informal written Norwegian.
One pronoun at the end (hennes) clearly attaches to both frisyren and sminken.

Why do we have “frisyren” and “sminken” (definite) and “hennes”? Isn’t that “double definiteness”?

Yes, this is double definiteness, and it’s normal in Norwegian when the possessive is after the noun:

frisyre → frisyren (the hairstyle)
frisyren hennes = her hairstyle (literally “the hairstyle her”)

Rule of thumb in Bokmål:

Postposed possessive (after noun):
- Use the definite form of the noun + the possessive
- boka mi, huset vårt, frisyren og sminken hennes
Preposed possessive (before noun):
- Use the indefinite form of the noun
- min bok, vårt hus, hennes frisyre og sminke

So “frisyren og sminken hennes” is exactly what we expect with a postposed possessive.

Why not use “sin” instead of “hennes” here? Could we say “Frisyren og sminken sin”?

No, “Frisyren og sminken sin ser helt annerledes ut …” is not correct here.

The reflexive possessive (sin / si / sitt / sine) refers back to the subject of the same clause:

Hun liker frisyren sin. = She likes her own hairstyle.
Hun synes frisyren og sminken sin ser rare ut.

In your sentence, the subject itself is:

Frisyren og sminken hennes

There is no other explicit subject (like hun) for sin to refer back to. If you tried “Frisyren og sminken sin …”, grammatically sin would have to refer to frisyren og sminken, which makes no sense (the hairstyle and makeup do not own themselves).

Therefore, “hennes” is the correct choice here.

What does “ser … ut” mean? Why can’t we just say “ser helt annerledes”?

In Norwegian there is an important distinction:

å se = to see (with your eyes)
- Jeg ser deg. = I see you.
å se ut
- adjective/adverb = to look / appear
- Hun ser pen ut. = She looks pretty.
- Det ser bra ut. = It looks good.
- Frisyren og sminken hennes ser helt annerledes ut.
  = Her hairstyle and makeup look completely different.

If you drop “ut”:

Frisyren og sminken hennes ser helt annerledes.
This would be understood as “her hairstyle and makeup see completely differently,” which is wrong or at best very odd.

So to talk about how something looks, you normally need the verb phrase “se ut”.

Why is the word order “ser helt annerledes ut” instead of “ser ut helt annerledes”?

With “se ut” meaning “to look/appear,” the natural pattern in Norwegian is:

se + (degree adverb) + adjective/adverb + ut

Examples:

Det ser veldig bra ut.
Han ser litt syk ut.
Hun ser ganske annerledes ut.

So:

Frisyren og sminken hennes ser helt annerledes ut
follows this pattern: ser
- helt
  - annerledes
    - ut.

Forms like “ser ut helt annerledes” are possible in theory, but they sound very unnatural and are not what native speakers normally say.

What does “helt” contribute in “helt annerledes”? Can we leave it out?

helt here is an intensifier meaning “completely / totally / entirely”.

annerledes = different
helt annerledes = completely/totally different

You can leave helt out:

Frisyren og sminken hennes ser annerledes ut enn i virkeligheten.

That would simply mean “look different” instead of “look completely different”. The sentence remains correct; it just sounds less strong.

Is “annerledes” an adjective or an adverb? Why doesn’t it change form?

annerledes is a bit special; it can function as:

an adjective-like word (“different”)
an adverb (“differently”)

In modern Norwegian, annerledes is invariable:

Han er annerledes. = He is different.
Tingene er annerledes nå. = Things are different now.
Det ser annerledes ut. = It looks different.

You do not add endings like -t or -e:

❌ annerledest
❌ annerledese

So “helt annerledes” is the same regardless of gender, number, or neuter nouns.

Why is it “annerledes enn” and not “annerledes som” or “annerledes fra”?

Norwegian comparatives have fairly fixed prepositions:

større enn = bigger than
bedre enn = better than
annerledes enn = different than / different from

So the natural pattern is:

annerledes enn + what it’s being compared to

Examples:

Hun ser annerledes ut enn før. = She looks different than before.
Sminken er annerledes enn på bildet.

Using “som” here is not standard Bokmål.
Using “fra” is normal with forskjellig:

forskjellig fra = different from

…but not with annerledes. So stick with “annerledes enn …”.

What exactly does “i virkeligheten” mean? Is it an idiom?

Literally:

virkelighet = reality
virkeligheten = the reality
i virkeligheten = “in (the) reality”

Idiomatic meaning: “in reality / in real life / actually.”

In this sentence:

enn i virkeligheten = than in reality / than in real life

It’s often used to contrast appearance vs. reality:

På bildet ser han høy ut, men i virkeligheten er han ganske lav.
= In the photo he looks tall, but in reality he is quite short.

You could also say “i det virkelige livet” (“in real life”), but “i virkeligheten” is shorter and very common.

Why are “frisyren” and “sminken” in the definite form?

They are definite because we are talking about specific, identifiable things:

her hairstyle (the one she has in the photo / now)
her makeup (the specific way she is made up)

With a postposed possessive (like hennes), Norwegian normally uses the definite form of the noun:

frisyren hennes (her hairstyle)
sminken hennes (her makeup)
frisyren og sminken hennes (her hairstyle and makeup)

So the definiteness comes from both:

the -en ending
and the hennes

Why is “sminke” used in the singular definite (“sminken”) when “makeup” is uncountable in English?

English and Norwegian treat this word differently:

English makeup is an uncountable noun.
Norwegian sminke is grammatically a regular countable noun, but it often behaves like a mass noun in meaning.

Forms:

en sminke (rare, usually only in special contexts)
sminke (indefinite)
sminken (definite) = “the makeup” / “her makeup”

In practice, you’ll mostly see:

sminke = (some) makeup
sminken hennes = her makeup (all of it, the way it’s done)

This is similar to other mass-like nouns in Norwegian that still take definite endings:

melken = the milk
vannet = the water

So “sminken hennes” is the normal way to say “her makeup”.

Does “ser” agree with both nouns (frisyren og sminken)? Should anything here be plural?

The subject is a compound: frisyren og sminken hennes (= two things).
In English you would say:

“Her hairstyle and makeup look different.”

In Norwegian, however, the present tense of the verb doesn’t change between singular and plural:

jeg ser
du ser
han/hun ser
vi ser
de ser

So “ser” is used for both singular and plural subjects. There is no extra ending like English -s.

Nothing else in the sentence needs to change; “ser helt annerledes ut” works the same whether the subject is one thing or several.