Log inSign up

Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.

Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.
The teacher only explains what is relevant for the exam.

Breakdown of Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.

være
to be
for
for
forklare
to explain
læreren
the teacher
bare
only
det som
what
eksamen
the exam
relevant
relevant
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Norwegian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Norwegian now

Questions & Answers about Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.

Why is it Læreren and not just lærer or en lærer?

Norwegian usually puts the definite article at the end of the noun, not as a separate word like English the.

  • lærer = teacher (indefinite, general)
  • en lærer = a teacher
  • læreren = the teacher

So Læreren forklarer … literally is The-teacher explains …, which in natural English is The teacher explains ….

You use læreren when both speaker and listener know which specific teacher you mean.

What does bare mean here, and why is it in that position?

In this sentence, bare means only, not just in the sense of “recently”.

  • Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant …
    = The teacher *only explains what is relevant …*

Position:
In main clauses, adverbs like bare typically go right after the verb (or after the subject if the verb is in 2nd position):

  • Læreren forklarer bare det … = correct, natural word order
  • Læreren bare forklarer det … = possible, but usually a different emphasis (more like “The teacher just explains it, (and doesn’t do more)”)

So the normal place for bare with this meaning is after the conjugated verb forklarer.

What does the structure det som er relevant literally mean? Why not use hva for “what”?

Det som is a very common way to say “that which / the thing that / what”.

  • det = that / it (neuter pronoun)
  • som = relative pronoun (that / which / who)

So det som er relevant is literally:
“that which is relevant” → what is relevant

Why not hva?

  • hva is used mainly in direct questions:
    • Hva forklarer læreren? – What does the teacher explain?

  • In statements like “what is relevant”, Norwegian usually prefers det som rather than hva:

    • bare det som er relevant = only what is relevant (natural)
    • bare hva som er relevant = much less common and often sounds off in this context.

So: in relative clauses like this (no question), det som is the go‑to structure.

What is som doing in this sentence? Can it be left out?

som here is a relative pronoun introducing a relative clause:

  • det som er relevant for eksamen
    = that which is relevant for the exam / what is relevant for the exam

Structure:

  • det = the thing(s)
  • som = that/which (relative pronoun referring back to det)
  • er relevant for eksamen = relative clause describing det

In this use, som cannot be left out:

  • ❌ det er relevant for eksamen (this becomes a new sentence: it is relevant for the exam)
  • ✅ det som er relevant for eksamen (that which is relevant for the exam)

So som is required to link det with the clause er relevant for eksamen.

Why is there no word for “the” before eksamen? Shouldn’t it be eksamenen?

Norwegian doesn’t always use the definite form where English uses the.

Here, for eksamen is more like for exams / for the exam in general rather than for that specific exam.

Compare:

  • Det er viktig for eksamen.
    = It’s important for the exam (as a general concept / for exam purposes).
  • Det er viktig for eksamenen.
    = It’s important for the (specific) exam. (a particular exam both people know about)

So in your sentence, eksamen is used more generically: what the teacher explains is what matters for exam purposes, not necessarily for one specific named exam.

Both forms are grammatically possible; which one you choose depends on whether you mean a specific exam (→ eksamenen) or exams in general / the exam as a concept (→ eksamen).

Why is the preposition for used in relevant for eksamen, instead of something like til or om?

In Norwegian, relevant for is the standard collocation:

  • relevant for eksamen = relevant for the exam
  • relevant for jobben = relevant for the job
  • relevant for deg = relevant for you

Using til here is not standard:

  • ❌ relevant til eksamen – sounds wrong/foreign in most contexts.

om would also change the meaning:

  • snakker om eksamen = talks about the exam
  • relevant om eksamen is odd; you normally don’t say it that way.

So you should remember the pattern:
relevant for + [something].

Does forklarer mean “explains” or “is explaining”? How do you show the difference in Norwegian?

Norwegian has one present tense that covers both English simple present and present continuous.

  • Læreren forklarer …
    can mean:
    • The teacher explains … (habitually / generally), or
    • The teacher is explaining … (right now, at this moment)

Context usually makes the meaning clear. If you really need to emphasize the ongoing nature, you can add time expressions or adverbs:

  • Læreren står og forklarer nå.
    = The teacher is (currently) explaining now.
  • Akkurat nå forklarer læreren det som er relevant for eksamen.
    = Right now the teacher is explaining what is relevant for the exam.

Could the word order with bare be changed? For example, what is the difference between
Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen
and
Bare læreren forklarer det som er relevant for eksamen?

Yes, moving bare changes the meaning and focus:

  1. Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.

    • bare limits what is explained.
    • Meaning: The teacher explains *only the things that are relevant for the exam (and nothing else).*

  2. Bare læreren forklarer det som er relevant for eksamen.

    • bare limits who explains.
    • Meaning: Only the teacher explains what is relevant for the exam (no one else does).

So:

  • bare + verb object → only that content
  • Bare + subject → only that person/subject
Is there any difference between bare and kun in this sentence?

Both bare and kun can mean only, but they differ in style and nuance:

  • bare: most common, neutral, used in speech and writing.
  • kun: a bit more formal or written, sometimes feels slightly more “restricted / limited” in tone.

You could say:

  • Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen. (neutral, very common)
  • Læreren forklarer kun det som er relevant for eksamen. (more formal, “the teacher restricts themselves to …”)

Meaning is basically the same here. In everyday spoken Norwegian, bare is more typical.

What is the difference between eksamen and prøve? Both can mean “exam”, right?

Yes, both relate to testing, but they’re used differently:

  • eksamen

    • tends to mean major / official exam, often at the end of a course, term, or degree
    • more formal, higher stakes

  • prøve

    • can be test / quiz / smaller exam
    • includes regular classroom tests, midterms, short quizzes, etc.

So:

  • Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen.
    → sounds like an important end‑of‑course exam.

  • Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for prøven.
    → more like a test or quiz in class.

How would you pronounce Læreren forklarer bare det som er relevant for eksamen naturally?

Approximate pronunciation in (standard-ish) Bokmål, using rough English-like hints:

  • Læreren → LAIR-uh-ren

    • æ like the a in cat but longer
    • final -en often sounds like -en or even -n

  • forklarer → for-KLAH-rer

    • stress on -kla-
    • or as in British for

  • bare → BAH-reh

    • a like in father

  • det → often just de (deh) in fluent speech

  • som → som or almost sum

  • er → air but short

  • relevant → re-le-VANT (last syllable stressed, like in many European languages)

  • for → for (short)
  • eksamen → eck-SAH-men (stress on -sa-)

Connected speech would smooth things out, roughly:

LAIR-uh-ren for-KLAH-rer BAH-re de som er re-le-VANT for eck-SAH-men.