Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Læreren viser oss hvordan en kort setning kan være en myk overgang mellom to avsnitt. - The teacher shows us how a short sentence can be a smooth transition between two paragraphs.

vise til noe = refer to something
vise for noen can occur, but usually with a slightly different nuance (e.g. put on a show for someone), and is much less common than simple vise noen noe.

In this sentence, the neutral, idiomatic form is viser oss, with no preposition.

Why is it oss and not vi after viser?

Vi is the subject form; oss is the object form.

Subject: vi (we)
Object: oss (us)

After a verb like vise, you need the object form:

Læreren viser oss ... = The teacher shows us ...
(We are receiving the action.)

If we were the subject, it would be:

Vi viser læreren noe. = We show the teacher something.

Why is it hvordan en kort setning kan være ... and not hvordan kan en kort setning være ...?

This is an indirect question / embedded question, not a direct question.

In a direct question, Norwegian uses verb-second word order:
- Hvordan kan en kort setning være en myk overgang?
  How can a short sentence be a soft transition?
In an indirect question introduced by a verb like vise, forklare, spørre, the clause behaves like a subordinate clause:
- Læreren viser oss hvordan en kort setning kan være en myk overgang ...

In subordinate clauses, the normal order is:

(subordinator) + subject + verb + (rest)

So:

hvordan (how)
en kort setning (subject)
kan være (verb phrase)
en myk overgang mellom to avsnitt (rest)

That’s why it is hvordan en kort setning kan være, not hvordan kan en kort setning være.

What is the function of hvordan here? Could you use at instead?

Hvordan means how and focuses on the manner or the way something happens or can be.

viser oss hvordan ... = shows us how ...

You could use at in a slightly different sentence:

Læreren viser oss at en kort setning kan være en myk overgang ...
= The teacher shows us that a short sentence can be a soft transition ...

Difference:

hvordan: suggests showing the way it works, often with examples, structure, or method.
at: simply states a fact, that something is possible/true.

In the original sentence, hvordan is very natural because the teacher is demonstrating how a short sentence functions as a transition.

Why is læreren in the definite form (with -en) while en kort setning and en myk overgang are indefinite?

In Norwegian:

Definite form (læreren) is used when the thing/person is known or specific in the context.
Indefinite form (en kort setning, en myk overgang) is used for a non-specific example or when introducing something new.

Here:

Læreren = the teacher, a specific teacher already known from context (e.g. the teacher of this class).
en kort setning = a short sentence, any short sentence, just an example.
en myk overgang = a soft transition, again a general type of thing, not one particular, already-known transition.

So the pattern matches the usual rule: specific, known = definite; new/general example = indefinite.

What gender is setning, and why is it en kort setning and not et kort setning?

Setning (sentence) is feminine in origin, but in Bokmål it usually behaves as a common gender (masculine) noun.

You will typically see:

en setning (a sentence)
setningen (the sentence)

In some styles you can also use the feminine forms:

ei setning, setninga

But et setning is wrong because setning is not neuter.

So:

en kort setning = a short sentence
(en matches a common-gender noun.)

What gender is overgang, and why is it en myk overgang, not et mykt overgang?

Overgang (transition) is a masculine/common gender noun.

Forms:

en overgang (a transition)
overgangen (the transition)

The adjective myk (soft) must agree with the noun:

common gender singular indefinite: en myk overgang
neuter singular indefinite: et mykt bord (a soft table – odd meaning, but grammatically fine)
plural/definite: de myke overgangene (the soft transitions)

So en myk overgang is correct; et mykt overgang would be wrong because overgang is not neuter.

Why is the adjective myk and not myke or mykt in en myk overgang?

Adjectives in Norwegian agree in gender, number, and definiteness.

For myk:

Common gender, singular, indefinite: myk
- en myk overgang
Neuter, singular, indefinite: mykt
- et mykt ord
Plural (both genders) and definite forms: myke
- to myke overganger
- den myke overgangen

Since overgang is common gender, singular, indefinite, you use myk:

en myk overgang

Why is it kan være and not just er in en kort setning kan være en myk overgang?

Kan is a modal verb meaning can / may / is able to / is capable of.

er = is (simple statement of fact)
kan være = can be / may be (possibility, potential)

So:

En kort setning er en myk overgang.
= A short sentence is a soft transition (as a general identity).
En kort setning kan være en myk overgang.
= A short sentence can serve as / can function as a soft transition (in some cases).

In the original sentence, we are talking about potential function – how a short sentence can be used between paragraphs – so kan være is more accurate than simply er.

Why is the verb in the present tense viser and not past viste?

Norwegian present tense is used both for:

Actions happening right now, and
General facts or repeated actions (like the English “The teacher shows us …” or “The teacher teaches us …”).

Here, the sentence likely states something general about what the teacher does (in lessons, in general):

Læreren viser oss ...
= The teacher shows us ... (habitually/typically, or right now in the narrative present)

If you wanted to describe a specific past event, you would use past tense:

Læreren viste oss hvordan en kort setning kan være en myk overgang ...
= The teacher showed us how a short sentence can be a soft transition ...

Why is it mellom to avsnitt and not mellom de to avsnittene?

Both are possible, but they mean slightly different things.

mellom to avsnitt
= between two paragraphs (any two paragraphs, said in a general way)
mellom de to avsnittene
= between the two paragraphs (two specific, known paragraphs)

In the original sentence, the meaning is general: the teacher is explaining how a short sentence can function between paragraphs in general, not just between two particular ones. Therefore, mellom to avsnitt (indefinite) is more natural.

Grammar points:

avsnitt is neuter:
- et avsnitt (a paragraph)
- to avsnitt (two paragraphs) – no extra ending in the plural indefinite
- avsnittene = the paragraphs (definite plural)

Is the word order Læreren viser oss hvordan ... fixed, or could I say Læreren viser hvordan ... til oss?

The natural word order with vise plus two objects is:

vise [person] [thing]
vise oss hvordan ...

So:

Læreren viser oss hvordan en kort setning kan være ...
is the standard and most idiomatic word order.

You could theoretically say:

Læreren viser hvordan en kort setning kan være ... til oss.

This is grammatically understandable, but it sounds less natural and can feel clumsy. Norwegian strongly prefers:

verb + indirect object (person) + direct object (thing)

Therefore, you should treat Læreren viser oss hvordan ... as the normal pattern and stick to it.