Learn Hardcore Norwegian: På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret. - At the meeting we use a loudspeaker because some people participate from the home office.

på møtet = “at the meeting” (attending/participating in that event).
- Very common: Jeg skal på møte. – “I’m going to a meeting.”
- Your sentence focuses on what happens at that event: at the meeting we use a speaker…
i møtet is used less frequently and can sound a bit more inside/during that specific meeting, or be more formal/technical.
- Example: I møtet tok vi flere viktige beslutninger. – “In the meeting we made several important decisions.”

For a learner, you can safely treat på møtet as the standard phrase for “in/at the meeting.”

Why is the word order På møtet bruker vi and not På møtet vi bruker?

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

In your example:

På møtet = first element (an adverbial: time/place)
bruker = finite verb (must come second)
vi = subject
en høyttaler = object

So:

På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler … ✅ (correct V2)
På møtet vi bruker en høyttaler … ❌ (violates V2: verb is third)

If you start with the subject instead, you still keep the verb second:

Vi bruker en høyttaler på møtet … ✅

So the pattern is:

[Anything]
Finite verb
Subject (if it wasn’t in position 1)
The rest

Could I also say Vi bruker en høyttaler på møtet instead of putting på møtet first?

Yes, absolutely.

Both are grammatically correct:

På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler …
Vi bruker en høyttaler på møtet …

The difference is mostly in emphasis and information structure:

På møtet bruker vi …
- Emphasises the setting (“At the meeting, what we do is: use a speaker…”).
- Often used when contrasting with other situations:
  - På kontoret sitter alle sammen, men på møtet bruker vi en høyttaler.
Vi bruker en høyttaler på møtet …
- Starts with the subject + action, more neutral, very similar to English word order:
  - “We use a speaker in the meeting…”

So it’s a stylistic choice, not a grammatical one.

Why is it en høyttaler and not høyttaleren?

En høyttaler is the indefinite form: “a speaker / a loudspeaker.”
Høyttaleren is the definite form: “the speaker.”

In this sentence, the speaker is mentioned for the first time, so Norwegian uses the indefinite form:

På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler …
= “At the meeting we use a speaker…”

If the speaker had already been introduced or was uniquely known from context, you could use the definite:

Vi har en høyttaler i rommet. På møtet bruker vi høyttaleren.
= “We have a speaker in the room. At the meeting we use the speaker.”

A tiny bit of grammatical info:

Indefinite singular: en høyttaler
Definite singular: høyttaleren
Indefinite plural: høyttalere
Definite plural: høyttalerne

The article en tells you that høyttaler is a masculine noun in Bokmål.

The English meaning is progressive (“are using / are attending”). Why is Norwegian using simple present bruker and deltar?

Norwegian does not have a separate grammatical present progressive form like English (“are using,” “are attending”).

The simple present in Norwegian (bruker, deltar) covers several English meanings:

Right now / ongoing:
- Vi sitter i møte nå. Vi bruker en høyttaler.
  = “We are in a meeting now. We are using a speaker.”
Habitual / general fact:
- På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler.
  = “At the meeting we use a speaker (that’s what we normally do).”
Planned / scheduled future (especially with a time expression):
- I morgen, på møtet, bruker vi en høyttaler.
  = “Tomorrow, at the meeting, we’ll use a speaker.”

So it’s normal and correct that Norwegian uses simple present bruker / deltar where English might use “are using / are attending / will use.”

What exactly does noen mean here? Why is there no word like “people” after it?

Noen is an indefinite pronoun that can mean:

“some (people)”
“someone”

In this sentence:

fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret
≈ “because some (people) are participating from home (office).”

Norwegian often omits the noun personer when context makes it clear we’re talking about people. So:

noen deltar ≈ noen personer deltar (some people participate)

You could make it more explicit if you want:

fordi noen personer deltar fra hjemmekontoret – sounds slightly heavier, more explicit.
fordi noen av oss deltar fra hjemmekontoret – “because some of us are participating from the home office.”

But in natural speech and writing, noen alone is very common when the “people” part is obvious.

How does the verb delta work here? Why is it deltar fra hjemmekontoret and not deltar på hjemmekontoret or something else?

The base pattern for å delta (“to participate / to take part”) is:

delta i / på noe – “participate in something”
- delta i møtet / på møtet – “participate in the meeting”
- delta på kurset – “participate in the course”

In your sentence, the thing they’re participating in (møtet) is understood from context and not repeated:

På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret.
≈ “At the meeting we use a speaker because some (people) are participating [in the meeting] from the home office.”

Here, fra hjemmekontoret describes where they participate from:

fra
- place = “from [place]”
  - fra hjemmekontoret – from the home office
  - fra kontoret – from the office

So:

delta på / i møtet – what they participate in
delta … fra hjemmekontoret – where they participate from

You normally don’t say delta fra noe to mean “participate in something”; fra here is purely about origin/place, not the event.

Why is it fra hjemmekontoret (definite singular) when noen is plural (“some people”)? Shouldn’t it be plural, like “from their home offices”?

Good observation. Grammatically:

et hjemmekontor – a home office (indefinite singular)
hjemmekontoret – the home office (definite singular)
hjemmekontorene – the home offices (definite plural)

In the sentence:

… fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret.

Norwegian uses the definite singular here in a generic, institutional way, similar to:

på skolen – at school
på jobben – at work
fra kontoret – from the office

It doesn’t literally mean there is one shared home office. It means each of those people is participating from their (respective) home office, but Norwegian can express that as fra hjemmekontoret.

If you want to make the “each has their own” idea explicit, you can say:

… fordi noen deltar fra hvert sitt hjemmekontor.
= “… because some (people) are participating from their own respective home offices.”

You’ll also see:

Jeg er på hjemmekontor i dag. – “I’m working from home today.” (fixed expression, no article)

So fra hjemmekontoret here is idiomatic and does not conflict with noen being plural; it’s using the common Norwegian pattern of definite singular for a “normal place of work / schooling / activity.”

What is the word order rule after fordi? Could I say fordi deltar noen fra hjemmekontoret or fordi at noen deltar …?

Fordi is a subordinating conjunction (“because”), so the clause after it is a subordinate clause, which in Norwegian normally has this order:

Subject – Verb – (other elements)

In your sentence:

fordi = conjunction
noen = subject
deltar = verb
fra hjemmekontoret = adverbial

So:

fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret ✅
(Subject before the verb)

You cannot invert like in a main clause:

fordi deltar noen fra hjemmekontoret ❌ (wrong word order for a subordinate clause)

About fordi at:

fordi at is used in speech and many dialects, and is accepted in modern Bokmål, but:
- Many style guides recommend simply fordi (especially in more formal writing).
- Fordi at often sounds more informal/regional.

So you can say:

… fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret. ✅ (neutral, recommended)
… fordi at noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret. ✅ (colloquial, acceptable, but sometimes avoided in formal text)

Should there be a comma before fordi: … en høyttaler, fordi noen deltar …?

Both with and without a comma are possible, but they give slightly different nuances.

Without comma (your version):
- På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret.
  Here, the reason clause is integrated and essential.
  It simply answers “Why do we use a speaker?” → “Because some participate from the home office.”
This is the most natural and neutral punctuation here.
With a comma:
- På møtet bruker vi en høyttaler, fordi noen deltar fra hjemmekontoret.
  The comma adds a small pause and can make the reason feel like an extra comment or afterthought, often with a bit more emphasis on the reason.
It’s not wrong, but it can sound a little heavier or more explanatory, depending on context.

A simple rule for learners:

For short, straightforward fordi-clauses that give the basic reason, it’s usually best to omit the comma, as in your original sentence.