Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt over vannet, og stien dit er både bratt og fuktig.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Norwegian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Norwegian now

Questions & Answers about Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt over vannet, og stien dit er både bratt og fuktig.

What does utsiktspunktet mean exactly, and how is the word built?

Utsiktspunktet is a compound noun with a definite ending:

  • ut – “out”
  • sikt – “view, sight”
  • utsikt – “view” (literally “out‑sight”)
  • punkt – “point”
  • utsiktspunkt – “viewpoint” / “viewing point”
  • utsiktspunktetthe viewpoint

Norwegian usually attaches the definite article as a suffix:

  • utsiktspunkt = a viewpoint
  • utsiktspunktet = the viewpoint

So -et here is the singular definite ending for a neuter noun (et utsiktspunkt – utsiktspunktet).


Why is ligger used here instead of er? Can I say Utsiktspunktet er høyt over vannet?

You can say er, and it would be understood and acceptable, but ligger is more idiomatic here.

Norwegian often prefers “position verbs” instead of the general være (er):

  • ligge – to lie, be located horizontally / spread out
  • stå – to stand, be located vertically / upright
  • sitte – to sit, be seated

For places, buildings, landmarks, etc., Norwegians commonly use ligger to say “is located”:

  • Oslo ligger ved fjorden.
  • Huset ligger på toppen av bakken.

So:

  • Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt over vannet ≈ “The viewpoint is (located) high above the water.”

Using er is not wrong, but ligger sounds more natural and specific.


Why is it høyt and not høy in ligger høyt over vannet?

Høy is the basic adjective “high / tall”:

  • et høyt fjell – a high mountain
  • en høy bygning – a tall building

Høyt here is the adverb form, describing how/where the viewpoint lies, not directly describing the noun:

  • Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt.It lies high (up).
  • Han hopper høyt.He jumps high.

In Norwegian, many adverbs are formed by adding -t to the neuter form of the adjective:

  • raskraskt (fast, quickly)
  • vakkervakkert (beautifully)
  • høyhøyt (high, highly)

So høyt here is the adverb “high up” modifying ligger.


What is the function of over in over vannet? Does it mean “above” or “over”?

In this context, over is best understood as “above”:

  • høyt over vannet – high above the water

Over is a very flexible preposition and can cover both English “over” and “above”. Here it indicates vertical distance:

  • Flyet fløy over byen. – The plane flew over the city.
  • Hytta ligger over tregrensa. – The cabin is above the tree line.

So over vannet in this sentence means the viewpoint is at a higher elevation than the water, not that it’s crossing to the other side.


Why is it vannet and not just vann?

Vann means “water” in general. Vannet means “the water” (definite form).

  • vann – water (indefinite)
  • vannet – the water (definite; a particular body of water)

The definite ending -et shows that we are talking about a specific stretch of water: a particular lake, river, or sea that is already known from context.

  • Vi badet i vannet. – We swam in the water (that specific lake/sea, not just water in general).

In the sentence, vannet suggests “that particular body of water near the viewpoint.”


What does stien mean, and how is it formed?

Stien is the definite form of sti:

  • en sti – a path / trail
  • stienthe path

So:

  • stien = “the path”
  • stien dit = “the path (that goes) there”

Here, sti is a common‑gender noun (en sti), so its definite singular ending is -en (stien).


What exactly does dit mean? How is it different from der?

Both dit and der are related to “there”, but:

  • der – “there” (location, static)
  • dit – “(to) there” (direction, movement)

Examples:

  • Jeg står der. – I’m standing there. (location)
  • Jeg går dit. – I’m going there. (movement to a place)

In stien dit, dit indicates the destination of the path:

  • stien dit – “the path (leading) there”

So the sentence implies: “the path to the viewpoint is both steep and damp.” You could also spell it out as stien som går dit (the path that goes there), but stien dit is shorter and natural.


How does både … og … work in både bratt og fuktig?

Både … og … is a paired construction meaning “both … and …”:

  • både A og B – both A and B

Examples:

  • Han er både smart og morsom. – He is both smart and funny.
  • Vi har både tid og penger. – We have both time and money.

In the sentence:

  • både bratt og fuktig – both steep and damp

So the structure is:

  • stien dit er både bratt og fuktig – “the path there is both steep and damp”

Why don’t bratt and fuktig take any endings here?

In stien dit er både bratt og fuktig, bratt and fuktig are predicative adjectives, coming after the verb er and describing the subject (stien).

In this predicative position, the basic form of the adjective is used, regardless of gender, when there is just one noun:

  • Stien er bratt. – The path is steep.
  • Veien er lang. – The road is long.
  • Huset er stort. – The house is big.
  • Hytta er liten. – The cabin is small.

The forms with extra endings are mainly used when the adjective comes before the noun:

  • en bratt sti – a steep path
  • et bratt fjell – a steep mountain
  • en fuktig sti – a damp path

So bratt and fuktig are already in their correct predicative forms here; no extra ending is needed.


Could you explain the difference between fuktig and våt?

Both relate to “wet”, but there’s a nuance:

  • fuktig – damp, moist, slightly wet

    • often used when something is not completely wet, but has moisture:
    • fuktig luft – humid air
    • fuktig jord – moist soil
    • en fuktig sti – a damp path (slippery, a bit wet)
  • våt – wet, soaked

    • used when something is clearly wet:
    • våte klær – wet clothes
    • En våt hund. – A wet dog.
    • Stien er helt våt. – The path is (really) wet.

So in this sentence, fuktig suggests the trail is moist or damp—probably muddy or slippery—rather than completely soaked.


Why is there a comma before og in this sentence?

Norwegian comma rules are a bit different from English.

Here, the sentence has two independent clauses:

  1. Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt over vannet
  2. stien dit er både bratt og fuktig

They are joined by og (“and”). In Norwegian, when og connects two full main clauses (each with its own subject and verb), you normally put a comma before og:

  • Jeg kom hjem, og jeg lagde middag.
  • Han åpnet døra, og hun gikk inn.

So:

  • Utsiktspunktet ligger høyt over vannet, og stien dit er både bratt og fuktig.

Both halves have their own subject (utsiktspunktet, stien) and verb (ligger, er), so the comma is standard.