Mottakeren sa at avsenderen kunne få en ny pakkelapp på postkontoret.

Because -en is the usual definite singular ending for many common-gender nouns in Norwegian.

• mottaker = recipient

• mottakeren = the recipient

• avsender = sender
• avsenderen = the sender

Unlike English, Norwegian usually attaches the definite article to the end of the noun instead of putting a separate word like the in front.

At means that and introduces a subordinate clause.

So:

• Mottakeren sa = the recipient said
• at avsenderen kunne få en ny pakkelapp ... = that the sender could get a new parcel label ...

In English, that is often optional. In Norwegian, at can also sometimes be omitted, but keeping it is very common and often clearer.

Because after at, Norwegian uses subordinate clause word order rather than main-clause V2 word order.

Here the order is:

• avsenderen = subject
• kunne = finite verb
• få = infinitive

So the clause is structured normally as subject + verb + rest.

A very important thing to notice is that subordinate clauses do not behave like main clauses when adverbs are added. For example:

• Main clause: Avsenderen kunne ikke få ...
• Subordinate clause: at avsenderen ikke kunne få ...

That is one of the key patterns learners need to get used to.

Kunne is the past tense of kan.

• kan = can
• kunne = could

Since the main verb is sa (past tense of si, to say), it is natural for the reported clause to use kunne as well:

• Mottakeren sa ...
• ... at avsenderen kunne få ...

This is similar to English backshifting in reported speech, although Norwegian is not always as strict about it as English.

Because after a modal verb like kunne, the next verb is normally in the bare infinitive.

So:

• kunne få = could get / could receive

You do not use å after modal verbs:

• correct: kunne få
• not: kunne å få

This is similar to English could get, not could to get.

It most naturally means get or receive, but få is a flexible verb and can overlap with the idea of be allowed to depending on context.

In this sentence, the most likely sense is:

• the sender could get a new parcel label at the post office

There is also a slight nuance of it was possible for the sender to obtain one there.

So få often covers meanings that English splits between several verbs.

Because pakkelapp is a common-gender noun, so in the singular indefinite form it takes:

• article en
• adjective form ny

So:

• en ny pakkelapp = a new parcel label

Compare with a neuter noun:

• et nytt hus = a new house

If pakkelapp were definite, it would become:

• den nye pakkelappen = the new parcel label

So the adjective changes depending on gender and definiteness.

Yes. Norwegian very often forms compound nouns as one word.

• pakke = parcel/package
• lapp = slip/label/tag

Together:

• pakkelapp = parcel label / shipping label

This is extremely common in Norwegian, and English speakers often want to split such words because English sometimes uses separate words more often.

Because på is the idiomatic preposition for many institutions and service locations in Norwegian.

So people often say:

• på skolen = at school
• på sykehuset = at the hospital
• på postkontoret = at the post office

Using i would focus more literally on being physically inside the building. In many contexts, på is simply the normal choice, even when the person is of course physically inside.

Because postkontor is a neuter noun.

• et postkontor = a post office
• postkontoret = the post office

So the definite singular ending is:

• -en for many common-gender nouns
• -et for many neuter nouns

That is why you get:

• mottakeren
• avsenderen
• but postkontoret

Yes, sometimes it can be omitted, especially in speech:

• Mottakeren sa avsenderen kunne få en ny pakkelapp på postkontoret.

But keeping at is often better because it makes the sentence clearer and more natural in standard written Norwegian, especially when the clause is fairly long or has full noun subjects like mottakeren and avsenderen.

So although omission is possible, at is the safest choice for learners.

Yes, but then you may create ambiguity about who is who.

For example:

• Han sa at hun kunne få en ny pakkelapp på postkontoret.
• Hun sa at han kunne få en ny pakkelapp på postkontoret.

That works grammatically, but it may be less clear than using the full nouns mottakeren and avsenderen.

Using the nouns is especially helpful when both people are being discussed in the same sentence.