Learn Hardcore Norwegian: I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke, og hun har en veldig enkel frisyre. - In reality she hardly uses makeup, and she has a very simple hairstyle.

Why is it I virkeligheten with the definite form -en (literally in the reality), when in English we say in reality, not in the reality?

In Norwegian, abstract nouns in fixed expressions are very often used in the definite form, where English would use no article:

i virkeligheten – in reality
i fremtiden – in the future
i fortiden – in the past
i sannheten (less common, but possible) – in (the) truth

So virkeligheten is simply the definite form of virkelighet (reality):

en virkelighet – an reality
virkeligheten – the reality

The phrase i virkeligheten is a fixed, idiomatic expression meaning in reality / actually / in fact. Saying i virkelighet is ungrammatical in standard Norwegian.

Why is the word order I virkeligheten bruker hun… and not I virkeligheten hun bruker…?

Norwegian main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb must be in second position in the sentence.

In your sentence:

I virkeligheten – first element (an adverbial phrase)
bruker – finite verb, in second position
hun – subject, in third position

So:

✅ I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke…
❌ I virkeligheten hun bruker nesten ikke sminke… (wrong: verb is not in position 2)

You could also start with the subject:

✅ Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke i virkeligheten…

Both are correct; the difference is emphasis:

I virkeligheten bruker hun… – emphasizes “in reality / actually”
Hun bruker … i virkeligheten – more neutral; just adds “in reality” as extra info.

Could I say Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke i virkeligheten instead of I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke? Is there any difference?

Yes, you can say both; they are both grammatical:

I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke…
- Emphasis on the contrast between reality and appearance.
- Often used when correcting a false impression:
  - In reality, she hardly uses any makeup… (as opposed to what you might think).
Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke i virkeligheten…
- Feels a bit more neutral.
- The adverbial i virkeligheten is just extra information at the end.

Meaning-wise they’re extremely close; it’s mostly a matter of focus and style. Both obey the V2 rule (finite verb in second place).

What exactly does nesten ikke sminke mean? Is it the same as ingen sminke or ikke noe sminke?

They are close, but not identical in nuance:

nesten ikke sminke
- Literally: almost no makeup
- Implies she uses a very small amount, but not necessarily zero.
- English: hardly any makeup, almost no makeup.
ingen sminke / ikke noe sminke
- Literally: no makeup at all.
- Stronger, more absolute: she doesn’t use makeup, period.

So:

I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke – she might put on a tiny bit sometimes.
I virkeligheten bruker hun ikke noe sminke – she uses no makeup.

Why is sminke used without an article here? Why not sminken or noe sminke?

Sminke is usually treated as a mass/uncountable noun in Norwegian, similar to water, sugar, money in English.

Common patterns:

Hun bruker sminke. – She uses makeup.
Hun bruker ikke sminke. – She doesn’t use makeup.
Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke. – She hardly uses any makeup.

You can say:

Hun bruker ikke noe sminke. – She doesn’t use any makeup.
Hun liker sminken sin. – She likes her makeup (a specific set of products she owns).

But in your sentence, we’re speaking about makeup in general, so the bare form sminke (no article) is the natural choice.

How does the placement of nesten ikke work? Could I say I virkeligheten bruker hun ikke nesten sminke?

The normal pattern is:

[verb] + [subject] + nesten ikke + [object]

So:

✅ I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke.

The alternative you suggested:

❌ … bruker hun ikke nesten sminke

is very odd and would basically not be used. Nesten belongs tightly with ikke in this meaning, forming the unit nesten ikke (almost not / hardly). You should keep them together and before the object:

✅ Hun spiser nesten ikke kjøtt. – She hardly eats any meat.
✅ De drikker nesten ikke alkohol. – They hardly drink any alcohol.

If you want to emphasize nesten, you use intonation, not a different word order.

In en veldig enkel frisyre, why are the adjectives in the order veldig enkel and not enkel veldig?

In Norwegian, when you have an adverb modifying an adjective, the normal order is:

article + adverb + adjective + noun

So here:

en – article
veldig – adverb (very)
enkel – adjective (simple)
frisyre – noun (hairstyle)

So:

✅ en veldig enkel frisyre – a very simple hairstyle
❌ en enkel veldig frisyre – ungrammatical / nonsensical

Some more examples:

et veldig stort hus – a very big house
en ganske interessant bok – a quite interesting book
en utrolig fin by – an incredibly nice city

What gender is frisyre, and why is it en frisyre and not ei frisyre or et frisyre?

Frisyre is a masculine noun in Norwegian Bokmål:

en frisyre – a hairstyle
frisyren – the hairstyle
flere frisyrer – several hairstyles
frisyrene – the hairstyles

You will sometimes see feminine forms (ei frisyre / frisyra) in more dialectal or Nynorsk-influenced writing, but in standard Bokmål, en frisyre is the usual dictionary form.

Et frisyre is wrong, because frisyre is not a neuter noun.

Why is there a comma before og hun har? Could we write the sentence without that comma?

Your sentence:

I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke, og hun har en veldig enkel frisyre.

The comma is placed before og because we are linking two main clauses:

I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke.
(I virkeligheten) hun har en veldig enkel frisyre.

Rule of thumb in Bokmål:

If og connects two full main clauses (each with its own subject and verb), you normally use a comma before og.
If og only connects parts (two verbs with same subject, two nouns in a list, etc.), you don’t use a comma.

So:

✅ Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke, og hun har en veldig enkel frisyre.
✅ Hun bruker nesten ikke sminke og har en veldig enkel frisyre. (here there’s only one clause; same subject, two verbs, no comma)

Both are correct, but the version without repeating “hun” tends to drop the comma as well.

Could we drop the second hun and just say …nesten ikke sminke og har en veldig enkel frisyre?

Yes. That’s a very natural alternative:

I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke og har en veldig enkel frisyre.

Here’s what changes:

We now have one main clause with one subject (hun) and two verbs (bruker and har).
Because there is only one clause, we normally do not put a comma before og in this version.

Both are fine:

…sminke, og hun har en veldig enkel frisyre. – more explicit, slightly more formal/clear.
…sminke og har en veldig enkel frisyre. – a bit more compact and fluent in speech.

What is the difference between i virkeligheten and words like egentlig or faktisk?

They can overlap in meaning, but they’re not identical.

i virkeligheten
- Literally: in reality
- Often contrasts appearance vs reality.
- I virkeligheten bruker hun nesten ikke sminke.
  – In reality, she hardly uses any makeup (even though she might look very polished in photos, etc.).
egentlig
- Means actually / really / in fact / in principle.
- Focuses on what is truly the case, sometimes compared to what was said before.
- Hun bruker egentlig nesten ikke sminke. – She actually hardly uses any makeup.
faktisk
- Means actually / in fact, often used to emphasize that something is true, maybe surprisingly or contrary to expectations.
- Hun bruker faktisk nesten ikke sminke. – She actually / in fact hardly uses any makeup.

In many sentences, you can swap i virkeligheten, egentlig, and faktisk, but:

i virkeligheten is more literal, about reality vs appearance.
egentlig/faktisk are more about correcting or emphasizing a statement.

How do you pronounce virkeligheten, sminke, and frisyre?

Approximate pronunciation in a neutral Eastern Norwegian accent (shown with rough English-like hints):

virkeligheten – /ˈvɪr.kəlɪ.heː.tən/
- virk- like “virk” (with short i as in “sit”)
- -e- in -lig- is a schwa-like sound (like the a in “sofa”)
- stress mainly on vir-: VIR-ke-li-he-ten
sminke – /ˈsmɪŋ.kə/
- smi- with short i as in “sit”
- -nk- like “nk” in “sink”
- final -e is a schwa (very short, like “uh”)
- stress on SMIN-: SMIN-ke
frisyre – /frɪˈsyː.rə/
- fri- with short i
- -sy- like a long u in French “tu” or German ü; a front-rounded sound
- final -e is again a schwa
- main stress on -sy-: fri-SY-re

If you focus on getting stress in roughly the right place and keeping the final -e very short and weak, you’ll sound much more natural.