Log inSign up

Vi burde ha kjøpt en lengre forlengelseskabel, for stikkontakten er for langt unna.

Vi burde ha kjøpt en lengre forlengelseskabel, for stikkontakten er for langt unna.
We should have bought a longer extension cord, because the outlet is too far away.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Norwegian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Norwegian now

Questions & Answers about Vi burde ha kjøpt en lengre forlengelseskabel, for stikkontakten er for langt unna.

Why does burde take ha kjøpt (past infinitive) instead of just kjøpe?

Burde + ha + past participle expresses a past obligation/expectation that wasn’t fulfilled: “we should have bought (but didn’t).”
If you say Vi burde kjøpe ..., that usually means “we should buy ...” (advice about now/future).

What is the grammatical role of burde here?

Burde is a modal verb (past form of bør). It doesn’t take å before the next verb, so you say burde ha kjøpt, not burde å ha kjøpt.

Why is it kjøpt and not kjøpte?

After ha, Norwegian uses the past participle, not the simple past.

  • å kjøpe → past participle kjøpt
  • Simple past would be Vi kjøpte ... (“We bought ...”), which is a statement of what happened, not an unrealized “should have.”
Why is it en lengre forlengelseskabel and not en lengere?

The comparative of many short adjectives is formed with -re, not -ere.

  • lang → lengre (comparative)
    Lengere is not standard Bokmål.
What’s the difference between lengre and lenger?

Both relate to lang, but they’re used differently:

  • lengre = comparative adjective (modifies a noun): en lengre kabel
  • lenger = comparative adverb (modifies a verb/phrase): kabelen rekker lenger (“reaches further”)
Why is stikkontakten definite (with -en)?

Stikkontakten means “the socket/outlet,” referring to a specific one in the situation (the one you’re trying to reach). Norwegian often uses the definite form when something is identifiable from context.

Why does the sentence use for twice, and are they the same for?

They’re two different uses: 1) for as a conjunction meaning because/for: ..., for stikkontakten ...
2) for as an adverb meaning too (excessively): er for langt unna = “is too far away”

Could I replace the first for with fordi?

Often yes, but it changes word order:

  • ..., for stikkontakten er for langt unna. (main-clause order after for)
  • ... fordi stikkontakten er for langt unna. (also common)
    If you start the sentence with fordi-clause, you get inversion in the main clause: Fordi ... , burde vi ...
Why is it for langt unna and not something like for langt vekk?

Unna and vekk both relate to “away,” but they’re not identical:

  • (for) langt unna is very common for physical distance: “(too) far away”
  • vekk often emphasizes being “gone/away” or movement away.
    In this sentence, for langt unna is the most natural.
What part of speech is unna here?

Unna functions like an adverb describing location/distance, and it pairs naturally with langt: langt unna (“far away”).

Why is it langt (neuter form) in for langt unna?

In expressions like langt unna, langt is used adverbially (“far”), and Norwegian typically uses the neuter form for many adverb-like uses of adjectives:

  • en lang kabel (adjective with a noun)
  • langt unna (adverbial “far away”)
Is forlengelseskabel just one word? How do I interpret it?

Yes—Norwegian frequently makes compounds as a single word.
forlengelses- + kabel = “extension cable”

  • forlenge = “to extend/lengthen”
  • forlengelse = “extension”
  • forlengelses- = linking form used in compounds
    So en forlengelseskabel = “an extension cable.”