Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Jeg må overføre pengene til deg i kveld, ellers rekker vi ikke fristen. - I have to transfer the money to you tonight, otherwise we won’t meet the deadline.

After modal verbs like må, kan, vil, skal, bør, the next verb is usually a bare infinitive (infinitive without å).
So Jeg må overføre ... is normal.
You’d use å when the infinitive is not directly governed by a modal, e.g. Jeg prøver å overføre pengene.

Does må mean must or have to? Can it also mean need to?

Må covers must / have to / need to depending on context. It often expresses necessity (practical or external).
If you want something more like a plan/intention, skal can fit: Jeg skal overføre pengene i kveld (more “I will/I’m going to transfer…”).
If it’s more like advice, bør is closer to “should”.

Why is pengene in the definite form (-ene)? Could it be penger?

Pengene = “the money” (specific money both speakers know about).
penger = “money” in a more general/unspecified sense.
In many real situations, a transfer refers to a specific amount already mentioned, so pengene is natural.

What’s the difference between overføre and other verbs like sende or betale?

overføre is specifically “transfer” (especially a bank transfer).
sende is “send” (can be used for money, but sounds more general: sende penger).
betale is “pay” (focuses on paying a bill/debt rather than the transfer method).
So overføre pengene strongly suggests a bank transfer.

Why is it til deg and not til du?

After prepositions like til, Norwegian uses the object form of the pronoun:

subject: du
object: deg
So til deg = “to you”.

Where can i kveld go in the sentence? Is the placement fixed?

It’s flexible, but placement changes what feels most natural/emphasized. Common options:

Jeg må overføre pengene til deg i kveld. (neutral)
I kveld må jeg overføre pengene til deg. (emphasizes “tonight”)
Norwegian word order is guided by V2 rules, but adverbials like i kveld can move for emphasis.

What exactly does ellers mean here, and are there alternatives?

ellers here means “otherwise / if not”. It introduces a consequence if the first clause doesn’t happen.
Alternatives:

hvis ikke (“if not”): ..., hvis ikke rekker vi ikke fristen (often you’d restructure to avoid double ikke)
ellers så is sometimes used in speech, but ellers alone is very common in writing.

Why is there a comma before ellers?

Because you have two independent clauses:
1) Jeg må overføre ... i kveld
2) ellers rekker vi ikke fristen
A comma commonly separates them, especially when the second clause begins with a connector like ellers, for, men, etc.

Why does the second part say rekker vi ikke ... and not vi rekker ikke ...?

This is the V2 rule (verb-second). When something other than the subject starts the clause (here: ellers), the finite verb comes next, and the subject follows:

Vi rekker ikke fristen. (subject first)
Ellers rekker vi ikke fristen. (adverb first → inversion)

What does rekker mean, and how is it different from klarer?

rekke is about having enough time / “making it in time.”
So rekker vi ikke fristen = “we won’t make the deadline / we won’t meet the deadline in time.”
klare is more about ability/being able to manage generally, not specifically time.

Why is ikke placed before fristen?

ikke normally comes before what it negates, and in Norwegian it typically appears after the finite verb and before objects/complements:
rekker (verb) + vi (subject) + ikke (negation) + fristen (object).
Putting ikke after the object (rekker vi fristen ikke) is not normal.

Why is it fristen (definite) and not en frist (indefinite)?

fristen = “the deadline” (a specific known deadline).
en frist = “a deadline” (introducing it as new/unspecified information).
In context, there’s usually a particular deadline both speakers know about, so definite form fits.