Til tross for regnet sitter vi en stund på uteplassen og ser utover fjorden.

Despite the rain we sit for a while on the outdoor area and look out over the fjord.

Breakdown of Til tross for regnet sitter vi en stund på uteplassen og ser utover fjorden.

• en: a
• vi: we
• og: and
• på: on
• sitte: to sit
• regnet: the rain
• fjorden: the fjord
• til tross for: despite
• uteplassen: the outdoor area
• stunden: the while
• se utover: to look out over

Questions & Answers about Til tross for regnet sitter vi en stund på uteplassen og ser utover fjorden.

What does til tross for mean, and how is it used compared to English?

Til tross for means “in spite of / despite” and is followed by a noun phrase, just like in this sentence:

• Til tross for regnet = In spite of the rain / despite the rain

Structure:

• til tross for + noun
  
  • til tross for regnet – despite the rain
  • til tross for kulden – despite the cold

If you want to use a full clause, you normally say:

• til tross for at + clause
  
  • Til tross for at det regner, sitter vi …
    = Despite the fact that it’s raining, we sit…

So:

• til tross for + noun
• til tross for at + clause

Why is it regnet and not just regn after til tross for?

Regn means “rain” in general.
Regnet is the definite form: “the rain”.

In this phrase, Norwegian typically uses the definite form:

• til tross for regnet
  = despite the rain (that is falling now / that we’re talking about)

You could say til tross for regn, but it sounds more like “despite (any) rain” in a very general way. For a specific situation (it is actually raining), til tross for regnet is the natural choice.

Why is the word order sitter vi and not vi sitter?

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

Here, the prepositional phrase Til tross for regnet is placed first for emphasis. That takes the first slot, so the verb must come next:

1. Til tross for regnet – first element (adverbial phrase)
2. sitter – verb (must be in position 2)
3. vi – subject

So we get:

• Til tross for regnet sitter vi …

If you start with the subject instead, then:

• Vi sitter en stund på uteplassen … (subject first, verb second)

Both are correct; they just emphasize different parts of the sentence.

Could I add a comma after Til tross for regnet, like in English?

In English, you’d almost always write:

• Despite the rain, we sit…

In Norwegian, a comma after a short fronted phrase like Til tross for regnet is not required and is usually left out:

• Til tross for regnet sitter vi … ✔️ (standard)
• Til tross for regnet, sitter vi … ❌ (looks odd in Bokmål)

Norwegian comma rules are stricter and largely based on clause structure, not on pausing or “breathing” as in English. Here, there is just one main clause, so no comma is needed.

Why is sitter used here instead of something like “are sitting”? Does Norwegian have a continuous tense?

Norwegian does not have a separate continuous/progressive tense like “am sitting” / “is sitting”.

The simple present sitter can mean both:

• we sit
• we are sitting

Context usually makes clear whether the action is happening right now or is a habit.

So:

• sitter vi en stund på uteplassen
  = we sit for a while on the patio
  = we’re sitting for a while on the patio

If you really want to stress that it’s happening right now, you can add an adverb like nå (now):

• Nå sitter vi på uteplassen. – Right now we’re sitting on the patio.

What exactly does en stund mean, and can I translate it as “for a while”?

Yes. En stund literally means “a while / a short period (of time)”.

• sitter vi en stund = we (will) sit for a while

You’ll often hear:

• en liten stund – literally “a little while”, very common and natural:
  • Vi sitter en liten stund til. – We’ll sit a little while longer.

So en stund ≈ for a while, en liten stund ≈ for a little while.

What is uteplassen, and why do we use på uteplassen instead of something like i uteplassen?

Uteplassen is a compound noun:

• ute = outside
• plass = place, spot
• uteplass = an outdoor sitting area: patio, terrace, deck, courtyard
• uteplassen = the outdoor sitting area

You use på with many surfaces / open areas / places you’re on, for example:

• på uteplassen – on the patio
• på verandaen – on the veranda
• på toget – on the train
• på kontoret – at the office

I is more like “in/inside” something. A patio is more like a surface or open area, so på uteplassen is correct, not i uteplassen.

What does utover add to ser utover fjorden? Could I just say ser fjorden?

Ser fjorden simply means “see the fjord” – you perceive it visually.

Ser utover fjorden adds a extra idea of direction and extent: you’re looking out over / across the fjord, taking it in with your gaze.

Nuance:

• ser fjorden – you see the fjord (it’s visible)
• ser utover fjorden – you look out over the fjord (your gaze travels outward over it)

So utover indicates an outward, spreading direction of looking (or movement).

Why is it fjorden and not just fjord?

Fjord is the indefinite form: “a fjord / fjord (in general).”
Fjorden is the definite form: “the fjord.”

In this context, the speakers are clearly referring to a specific, known fjord (the one they’re sitting by), so Norwegian uses the definite:

• ser utover fjorden – look out over the fjord (this particular one)

This is similar to English “the sea”, “the river” when it’s clear which one you’re talking about.

What’s the difference between til tross for regnet and selv om det regner?

Both can translate to “although / despite (the fact that) it’s raining”, but the grammar is different:

• til tross for regnet

  • prepositional phrase
  • followed by a noun (regnet)
  • Despite the rain, …

• selv om det regner

  • conjunction + clause
  • followed by a full clause (det regner)
  • Although it’s raining, …

You could rewrite the original sentence as:

• Selv om det regner, sitter vi en stund på uteplassen og ser utover fjorden.

Meaning is very close. Selv om is often more neutral and very common in speech; til tross for is slightly more formal or stylistically marked.

Could I say Til tross for at det regner instead of Til tross for regnet?

Yes.

• Til tross for regnet sitter vi …
  = Despite the rain, we sit…

• Til tross for at det regner, sitter vi …
  = Despite the fact that it’s raining, we sit…

In the second version:

• til tross for at + clause (det regner is the clause).

Both are grammatically correct. The version with regnet (a noun) is shorter and a bit more natural in everyday language in this context.

How can I tell that regnet here is the noun “the rain” and not the verb “rained”?

Norwegian regnet can be:

• past tense of å regne – to rain:
  
  • Det regnet i går. – It rained yesterday.
• or the definite form of the noun “rain”:
  
  • Regnet var kraftig. – The rain was heavy.

In this sentence, regnet comes after a preposition (for):

• til tross for regnet

After a preposition you normally need a noun phrase, not a finite verb, so here regnet must be the noun: the rain.

Also, there is no subject like det (it) before it, which you would expect if regnet were a verb in a clause.

Can I move Til tross for regnet to the end of the sentence?

Yes, that’s possible:

• Vi sitter en stund på uteplassen og ser utover fjorden, til tross for regnet.

Meaning is essentially the same. The difference is:

• Til tross for regnet sitter vi …
  – Puts more emphasis on the contrast right at the beginning.

• Vi sitter …, til tross for regnet.
  – States what you do first, then adds the contrast at the end.

Both are grammatical and natural; it’s mostly a matter of style and emphasis.