Does a term being normalizable mean the same as the term has a normal form? From Types and Programming Languages by Pierce


  A term $t$ is in normal form if no evaluation rule applies to it—
  i.e., if there is no $t'$ such that $t -→ t'$. 


and


  A term $t$ is typable (or well typed) if there is some $T$ such that $t : T$.


In the pure simple typed lambda calculus:


  we consider another fundamental theoretical property of the
  pure simply typed lambda-calculus: the fact that the evaluation of a well-
  typed program is guaranteed to halt in a ﬁnite number of steps—i.e., every
  well-typed term is normalizable.


Does a term being normalizable mean the same as the term has a normal form?

Here is a term which has no normal form in the untyped lambda calculus:


  Recall that a term that cannot take a step under the evaluation relation is
  called a normal form. Interestingly, some terms cannot be evaluated to a nor-
  mal form. For example, the divergent combinator
  
  $$omega = (λx. x x) (λx. x x);$$
  
  contains just one redex, and reducing this redex yields exactly omega again!
  Terms with no normal form are said to diverge.


In the pure simple typed lambda calculus, 


is $omega$ typable (i.e. well-typed)? 
is $omega$ normalizable?
does $omega$ have a normal form?
Yes, a term is normalizable if, and only if, it has a normal form.

It is well known that $\omega = (\lambda x . x x) (\lambda x . x x)$ is not typeable, nor is it normalizable. It is not normalizable because it has an evaluation step ($\beta$-reduction) which evaluates it to itself, so we get $\omega \mapsto \omega \mapsto \omega \cdots$.

To see that it is not typeable, observe that already its subexpression $\lambda x . x x$ is not typeable. For if $x$ has type $T$ then in order for $x x$ to have a type, $T$ must be of the form $T \equiv T \to S$ (because $x$ is applied to something, therefore by the typing rules it must have a function type). But there is no type $T$ such that $T \equiv T \to S$, because the type on the right-hand side is larger (as a syntactic expression) than the type on the left-hand side.