Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale, håper jeg.

Next year we will have negotiated a better collective agreement, I hope.

Breakdown of Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale, håper jeg.

• jeg: I
• ha: to have
• en: a
• vi: we
• skulle: shall
• håpe: to hope
• neste: next
• bedre: better
• året: the year
• tariffavtalen: the collective agreement
• forhandle fram: to negotiate

Questions & Answers about Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale, håper jeg.

What is the role of skal in Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram …? Is this a future tense?

Norwegian does not have a separate, inflected future tense like English will. Instead it usually uses:

• skal
• vil
• kommer til å
• or just the present tense

In Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram …, skal is an auxiliary that points to the future, similar to will or shall.

Here, combined with ha forhandlet, it expresses a future perfect meaning: by next year, we will have negotiated…

What exact construction is skal vi ha forhandlet? How is it formed?

Skal vi ha forhandlet is a future perfect construction.

Structure:

• skal – present tense of the modal verb å skulle
• ha – infinitive of å ha
• forhandlet – past participle of å forhandle

So the pattern is:

skal + ha + past participle
skal ha forhandlet = will have negotiated

This is often called perfektum infinitiv (perfect infinitive) in Norwegian: ha forhandlet is the perfect infinitive, and skal puts it into the future.

Why do we say forhandlet fram instead of just forhandlet?

Forhandle by itself means to negotiate, focusing on the process.

Forhandle fram is a particle verb (verb + small word) that focuses on achieving a result through negotiation, like negotiate and obtain / work out.

• forhandle – to negotiate (process)
• forhandle om noe – to negotiate about something
• forhandle fram noe – to negotiate something into existence / work out an agreement

In this sentence, forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale suggests that the negotiations have led to a concrete, improved agreement.

What exactly does tariffavtale mean, and how is this word built?

Tariffavtale is a compound noun:

• tariff – wage scale, pay rates, often in a union/employment context
• avtale – agreement, contract

Together, tariffavtale usually means a collective wage agreement or collective bargaining agreement between employers and employees’ organizations (unions). It covers pay and working conditions.

Form:

• en tariffavtale – a collective agreement
• tariffavtalen – the collective agreement (definite singular)
• tariffavtaler – collective agreements (plural)

Why does the sentence start with Neste år and then skal? Could I also say Vi skal ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale neste år?

Yes, you can say both; they are both correct.

Norwegian has a verb-second (V2) word order in main clauses:

1. One element in front (subject, time expression, object, etc.)
2. Then the finite verb (here: skal)
3. Then the subject (if it was not first)

So:

• Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale.
  – Time expression (Neste år) first, then finite verb (skal), then subject (vi).

• Vi skal ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale neste år.
  – Subject (Vi) first, then finite verb (skal).

Both are grammatical. Putting Neste år first gives a bit more emphasis on the time frame.

Why is there a comma before håper jeg, and why is it håper jeg and not jeg håper?

The part håper jeg is functioning as a comment added to the whole sentence, like English I hope at the end:

• Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale, håper jeg.
  Next year we will have negotiated a better collective agreement, I hope.

The comma separates the main statement from the speaker’s comment.

Word order:

• håper jeg here behaves like a short, parenthetical clause tagged on at the end. In this kind of tag, Norwegian very often uses [verb + subject] order:
  
  • …, tror jeg. (I think)
  • …, ser det ut til. (it seems)
  • …, håper jeg. (I hope)

You could say …, jeg håper., but that sounds less natural as a tag; it feels more like starting a new sentence. The pattern …, håper jeg. is the idiomatic one in this position.

What is the difference between ending with håper jeg and starting with Jeg håper at …?

They are both correct but differ in emphasis and style.

1. Jeg håper at vi neste år skal ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale.

   • More neutral, typical sentence.
   • Focus is on the hoping.
   • Uses a full clause with at (that), though at can be dropped in everyday speech:
     Jeg håper (at) vi neste år skal ha forhandlet fram …

2. Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale, håper jeg.

   • Focus is more on the statement itself (that there will be a better agreement).
   • Håper jeg is added as a lighter, afterthought-style comment.
   • Feels a bit more conversational.

So the choice is about nuance and what you want to foreground: the hoping (Jeg håper at …) or the concrete prediction/plan (… , håper jeg.).

Could you also say Neste år vil vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale? What is the difference between skal and vil here?

Yes, you can say that, and it is understandable and grammatical:

• Neste år vil vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale.

Nuances (simplified):

• skal often suggests:

  • plan, arrangement, obligation, or something decided
  • more like we are going to / are supposed to

• vil often suggests:

  • willingness, desire (want to) or a prediction (will probably)
  • more like we will (in my opinion)

In this specific sentence, skal sounds slightly more like a plan/goal of the negotiating parties, while vil can sound more like a prediction about what will happen. However, in everyday speech the difference can be quite subtle, and both can be used.

What is the difference between fram and frem in forhandlet fram?

Fram and frem are just spelling variants of the same word in Bokmål. They mean the same thing (forward, forth, out in various contexts).

• fram – somewhat more common in many modern and informal contexts
• frem – somewhat more traditional/formal-looking, still perfectly correct

So you can write:

• forhandlet fram en avtale
• forhandlet frem en avtale

Both are standard Bokmål.

Why do we need ha in skal vi ha forhandlet? Why not just skal vi forhandle?

The choice changes the time perspective.

• skal vi forhandle – we will negotiate (simple future; the negotiation will take place in the future)
• skal vi ha forhandlet – we will have negotiated (future perfect; by a certain future point, the negotiation will already be finished)

In the sentence:

• Neste år skal vi ha forhandlet fram en bedre tariffavtale …

the idea is: by next year, at that future point, the negotiations are already done and the better agreement is in place.

In skal vi ha forhandlet, why does vi come after skal and before ha?

Because of Norwegian word order with modal verbs:

1. The finite verb (here the modal skal) must be in second position in a main clause (V2 rule).
2. The subject (here vi) normally comes right after the finite verb when it’s not in first position.
3. Other verbs (infinitives, participles) come later.

So we get:

• Neste år (1st position)
• skal (finite verb, 2nd position)
• vi (subject)
• ha forhandlet (non-finite verb phrase)

You cannot say Neste år skal ha vi forhandlet …; that breaks the normal Norwegian word order.

Why does forhandlet use ha as its auxiliary and not være, like some other verbs do?

In Norwegian, most verbs form the perfect tenses with ha:

• Jeg har jobbet. – I have worked.
• Vi har forhandlet. – We have negotiated.

Only a limited group of verbs typically use være as the auxiliary, mostly:

• verbs of movement or change of state, when they are intransitive:
  • gå – Han er gått.
  • komme – Hun er kommet.
  • bli – Det er blitt vanskelig.

Forhandle does not belong to that special group, so it uses ha:

• Vi har forhandlet.
• Vi skal ha forhandlet.