Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.

I let the traffic flow past before I walk across the street.

Breakdown of Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.

• jeg: I
• gå: to walk
• før: before
• gaten: the street
• trafikken: the traffic
• la: to let
• over: across
• flyte forbi: to drift past

Questions & Answers about Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.

What does lar mean here, and how does the structure lar trafikken flyte forbi work?

Lar is the present tense of the verb å la, which means to let / allow.

The structure is:

• Jeg – I
• lar – let / allow
• trafikken – the traffic
• flyte – flow
• forbi – past / by

So jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi literally means I let the traffic flow by.

Grammatically, this is a causative construction:

å la + (object) + infinitive
la noe(n) gjøre noe = let something/someone do something

Examples:

• Jeg lar barna leke. – I let the children play.
• Hun lar hunden sove i sengen. – She lets the dog sleep in the bed.

In your sentence, it’s close in meaning to I wait for the traffic to pass, but it emphasizes allowing/letting it happen rather than the act of waiting itself.

Why is it trafikken (with -en) and not just trafikk?

Norwegian often uses the definite form where English uses a general or unmarked noun.

• trafikk – traffic (indefinite)
• trafikken – the traffic (definite)

In contexts like this—real traffic in front of you—it feels natural in Norwegian to talk about the traffic you see:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi.
  → I let the traffic flow by (the traffic that is currently there).

Using trafikk without -en would sound more abstract or generic, like “traffic in general,” and is less natural in this concrete, situational sentence.

What’s the difference between flyte forbi and using a verb like passere?

• flyte forbi literally means to flow past/by, and it has a slightly more visual or metaphorical feel. It fits well with trafikken because you can imagine the cars like a flowing stream.
• passere means to pass, more neutral and direct.

You could say:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi. – I let the traffic flow by.
• Jeg lar trafikken passere. – I let the traffic pass.

Both are correct. Flyte forbi paints a bit more of a picture; passere is more matter‑of‑fact.

Why is the clause før jeg går over gaten in the present tense, even though it’s talking about a future action?

Norwegian, like English, often uses the present tense for near future, especially in time clauses.

• før jeg går over gaten – before I cross the street

You do not need a special future form here. Compare:

• English: I’ll wait before I cross the street. (present cross for the future action)
• Norwegian: Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.

You can say før jeg skal gå over gaten, but that sounds a bit heavier or more planned; in this simple everyday situation, før jeg går is most natural.

Can I move før jeg går over gaten to the beginning of the sentence?

Yes. Then you get:

• Før jeg går over gaten, lar jeg trafikken flyte forbi.

Important points:

1. Comma: You need a comma between the subordinate clause and the main clause.
2. Inversion: After a fronted clause, the verb in the main clause comes straight after the comma:
   • …, lar jeg trafikken flyte forbi. (verb lar before subject jeg)

So both are correct:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.
• Før jeg går over gaten, lar jeg trafikken flyte forbi.

Why is it går over gaten and not a verb like krysser gaten?

Both are possible, but they have slightly different nuances:

• gå over gaten – literally walk over the street; this is the most common, neutral way to say “cross the street” in everyday speech.
• krysse gaten – literally cross the street; a bit more formal or technical, often used in writing, instructions, or more careful speech.

So you could say:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten. (very natural)
• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg krysser gaten. (also correct, slightly more formal)

What’s the difference between gaten and gata?

Both mean the street.

• gaten – standard Bokmål definite form (gate → gaten)
• gata – alternative Bokmål form, more common in speech and in many dialects

So:

• over gaten and over gata both mean over the street.

Many native speakers prefer gata in informal contexts:

• Jeg går over gata.

In more formal writing, gaten is very common.

Could I say veien instead of gaten, and what’s the difference?

Yes, you could say:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over veien.

Differences:

• gate – a street, usually in a town/city
• vei – a road (more general; can be in or out of town)

In everyday conversation, over veien is very common, even for city streets. Both over gaten and over veien work; which one people use often depends on habit and dialect.

Can I drop jeg like in some other languages, or is jeg required?

In Norwegian, the subject pronoun jeg is required. You cannot drop it the way you might in Spanish or Italian.

Correct:

• Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi.

Incorrect:

• Lar trafikken flyte forbi. (sounds like a fragment unless it’s an imperative or part of a larger sentence)

Norwegian is not a “null-subject” language; you need to state the subject in normal sentences.

Is the word order jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi fixed, or can I move things around?

The normal word order here is:

Subject – verb – object – infinitive – adverb
Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi.

The parts you cannot move without it sounding wrong are:

• lar trafikken flyte must stay in that order:
  
  • Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi. ✅
  • Jeg lar flyte trafikken forbi. ❌ (incorrect)
  • Jeg trafikken lar flyte forbi. ❌ (incorrect)

You could move forbi in some contexts (e.g. flyte forbi meg, flyte forbi huset), but not between lar and flyte.

So, think of lar + [object] + infinitive as a unit that sticks together.

Why is it før and not først?

• før = before (a conjunction here, linking two actions)
  
  • før jeg går over gaten – before I cross the street
• først = first / firstly (an adverb, often indicating order in a sequence)
  
  • Først lar jeg trafikken flyte forbi, så går jeg over gaten.
    – First I let the traffic flow by, then I cross the street.

In your sentence, you are linking two actions in time (A happens before B), so you must use før, not først.

Could I use vent instead of lar to say “I wait for the traffic to pass”?

Yes, but the structure changes. You can say:

• Jeg venter til trafikken har passert før jeg går over gaten.
  – I wait until the traffic has passed before I cross the street.

Or simpler:

• Jeg venter til trafikken er borte. – I wait until the traffic is gone.

Lar trafikken flyte forbi puts the focus on allowing/letting the traffic go by.
Venter puts the focus on you waiting.

Both describe almost the same real‑world behavior; they just highlight different aspects.

Is jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi more like a description of a habit, or what I’m doing right now?

In isolation, the present tense in Norwegian can mean either:

1. Right now / current action

   • Said while you are standing at the curb watching the cars:
     Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.

2. General habit / typical behavior

   • Describing how you usually behave:
     Når jeg er i byen, lar jeg alltid trafikken flyte forbi før jeg går over gaten.
     (When I’m in the city, I always let the traffic flow by before I cross the street.)

Context will decide which one is meant. The grammar is the same.

Could I say Jeg lar trafikken gå forbi instead of flyte forbi?

You can say:

• Jeg lar trafikken gå forbi.

It’s understandable and not wrong, but it’s less idiomatic than flyte forbi or passere when talking about traffic.

Rough nuances:

• flyte forbi – flow by (very natural with traffic)
• passere – pass (very natural and neutral)
• gå forbi – go by; often used for people walking past, opportunities going by, etc.

If you want something very natural and simple, Jeg lar trafikken passere or Jeg lar trafikken flyte forbi are the best choices.