Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Barna lærer å snakke direkte med hverandre fremfor å skrive sinte meldinger i gruppechatten. - The children learn to talk directly to each other rather than write angry messages in the group chat.

You can say de barna, but that adds extra emphasis, like “those children” / “those particular children”.
In this sentence, barna on its own is the natural way to say “the children” in general.

How does lærer å snakke work grammatically? Is å the same as “to” in English?

Yes. Here å is the infinitive marker, similar to “to” in English before a verb.

The pattern is:

å lære å + infinitive = to learn to + verb

So:

Barna lærer å snakke ...
= The children are learning to speak / learning to talk ...

Other examples:

Jeg lærer å kjøre bil. – I’m learning to drive (a car).
Hun lærer å skrive norsk. – She is learning to write Norwegian.

Don’t confuse å with og (and).
Saying lærer og snakke is a common learner mistake; it must be lærer å snakke here.

Can the word order change? Could I say Barna lærer å snakke med hverandre direkte instead?

Yes, you can move direkte:

Barna lærer å snakke direkte med hverandre ... (original)
Barna lærer å snakke med hverandre direkte ... (also correct)

Both are grammatical. The difference is small:

snakke direkte med hverandre slightly highlights the manner of speaking (directly, openly).
snakke med hverandre direkte puts direkte a bit closer to their interaction with each other, but in everyday speech most people will not feel a big difference.

What you generally don’t say is:

✗ Barna lærer direkte å snakke med hverandre ... – sounds odd here.

A safe rule: with å + verb, adverbs like direkte often come after the infinitive:

å snakke direkte, å jobbe hardt, å skrive sakte, etc.

What exactly does hverandre mean, and when do I use it?

Hverandre means “each other / one another”.

You use it when two or more people do something to or with each other:

Vi liker hverandre. – We like each other.
De hjelper hverandre. – They help each other.
Barna snakker med hverandre. – The children talk with each other.

Important points:

It’s only used with plural subjects (we, you-plural, they, the children, etc.).
You can’t say “jeg og hverandre” or something like that.
It does not change for gender or number. It’s always just hverandre.

In your sentence med hverandre = “with each other”, showing the communication goes both ways.

What does fremfor mean here? How is it different from i stedet for?

Both can translate as “instead of / rather than”, but there’s a nuance:

fremfor often suggests a preference or something that is better / preferable.
i stedet for is more neutral: one thing replaces another, without necessarily implying it’s better.

In this sentence:

... fremfor å skrive sinte meldinger ...
implies it’s better that they talk directly than write angry messages.

If you switch to i stedet for, the basic meaning is still fine:

Barna lærer å snakke direkte med hverandre i stedet for å skrive sinte meldinger ...

It just sounds a bit more neutral, less “value-loaded” than fremfor.

Why is it sinte meldinger and not sint meldinger?

Because of adjective agreement in the plural.

The adjective sint (angry) changes like this:

singular, masculine/feminine: en sint gutt – an angry boy
singular, neuter: et sint barn – an angry child
plural (all genders): sinte barn, sinte gutter, sinte meldinger

So when the noun is plural indefinite, the adjective takes -e:

sinte meldinger – angry messages

If it were one message, you would say:

en sint melding – an angry message
(here you need the article en and the adjective stays sint, not sinte)

Could it be sinte meldingene instead of sinte meldinger? What would be the difference?

Yes, sinte meldingene is grammatically correct, but the meaning changes:

sinte meldinger = angry messages (in general, not specified)
sinte meldingene = the angry messages (specific ones you and the listener know about)

In your sentence, the point is more general: the children are learning a better way to handle conflict, rather than sending angry messages in general. That’s why sinte meldinger (indefinite plural) is the more natural choice.

Why is it snakke direkte med hverandre and not snakke direkte til hverandre?

Both snakke med and snakke til exist, but they’re used differently:

snakke med noen = talk with someone, usually two‑way, a conversation
snakke til noen = speak to someone, often one‑way (lecturing, scolding, addressing)

Examples:

Jeg vil snakke med deg. – I want to talk with you (a dialogue).
Læreren snakket strengt til eleven. – The teacher spoke strictly to the pupil (one-way, telling them off).

In your sentence, the idea is that the children have real conversations with each other, not just lecture or shout at each other, so med hverandre is the natural and idiomatic choice.

What does the present tense lærer express here? Is it “learn” or “are learning”?

Norwegian has only one present tense form (lærer) where English has both “learn” and “are learning”.

So Barna lærer ... can mean:

The children learn ... (habitual/general fact)
The children are learning ... (ongoing process, like in a program or over time)

The exact English translation depends on context, but lærer itself covers both ideas. Here, it likely means that as part of their upbringing or schooling, they are learning / learn to do this.

How is gruppechatten built? Why is it one word and why does it end in -en?

Gruppechatten is a compound noun:

gruppe (group) + chat (chat) → gruppechat (group chat)
gruppechat
- -en (definite singular ending for a masculine noun)
  → gruppechatten = the group chat

Points to note:

Norwegian normally writes compounds as one word:
- gruppechat, barnerom, skrivebord, etc.
Chat in Norwegian is usually treated as masculine (en chat):
- en gruppechat – a group chat
- gruppechatten – the group chat

That’s why you see -en at the end, not -et or -a.

Could you say i en gruppechat or på gruppechatten instead of i gruppechatten?

Yes, but the meaning and feel change slightly.

i gruppechatten = in the group chat (a specific one that “we” share)
i en gruppechat = in a group chat (some group chat, not necessarily one particular known chat)

So the choice between i and en / -en is about definiteness (“the” vs “a”).

As for i vs på:

i gruppechatten is very common and neutral: in the group chat
på chatten / på gruppechatten also occurs in speech; some people prefer på for online platforms, a bit like på Facebook, på Instagram.

In your sentence, i gruppechatten sounds completely natural and probably the most standard.

Is there any difference between å lære å snakke and å lære å prate here?

Both are possible, but there’s a nuance between snakke and prate:

snakke – neutral “to speak / to talk”
prate – more informal / chatty, like “to chat”

So:

å lære å snakke direkte med hverandre
= learn to talk/speak directly with each other (neutral, suitable in almost any context)
å lære å prate direkte med hverandre
= learn to chat/talk informally directly with each other (slightly more colloquial tone)

In a sentence about what children are being taught (for example at school or in a program), snakke is usually the more natural and neutral verb.