Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt, ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe.

It is a past unreal conditional (also called a counterfactual conditional).

The speaker is talking about something that did happen, and imagining how things would have been different if the situation had been different.

Structure:

• Hvis ... havde været ... = If ... had been ...
• ... ville jeg ikke have skrubbet ... = ... I would not have scrubbed ...

So the sentence is built like:

• if-clause: imagined past condition
• main clause: imagined past result

This is very similar to English:

• If the pot hadn’t been so dirty, I wouldn’t have scrubbed it so long.

Because Danish uses past perfect in the if-clause of a past counterfactual.

• havde = had
• været = been

So:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt
  = If the pot had not been so dirty

This matches English quite closely.

Why været? Because the verb is være (to be), and været is its past participle.

So the pattern is:

• have/havde + past participle

Examples:

• Hvis jeg havde vidst det ... = If I had known that ...
• Hvis hun havde været hjemme ... = If she had been home ...

This is the Danish way to form the conditional perfect, which is used for an imagined result in the past.

Parts:

• ville = would
• have = have
• skrubbet = scrubbed

So:

• ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe
  = I would not have scrubbed it for so long

This is the same basic idea as English would have scrubbed.

A very common pattern is:

• ville have + past participle

Examples:

• Jeg ville have taget bussen. = I would have taken the bus.
• Hun ville ikke have sagt det. = She would not have said it.

Because Danish is a V2 language in main clauses. That means the finite verb usually comes in the second position.

Here, the sentence begins with the subordinate if-clause:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt

That whole clause takes the first position. So in the main clause, the finite verb must come next:

• ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe

So the order is:

1. Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt
2. ville
3. jeg
4. ikke
5. have skrubbet den så længe

If you started directly with the main clause, it would be:

• Jeg ville ikke have skrubbet den så længe.

But after a fronted clause, inversion happens:

• ..., ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe.

Because negation placement is different in subordinate clauses and main clauses.

In the subordinate clause:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt

Here ikke comes before the finite verb havde. That is normal in Danish subordinate clauses.

In the main clause:

• ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe

Here ikke comes after the finite verb (ville) and after the subject (jeg) in this inverted structure.

This is a very important Danish word-order pattern.

Compare:

• Jeg ville ikke gøre det.
• Hvis jeg ikke havde tid, ville jeg ikke gøre det.

So the placement of ikke is not random; it follows the usual Danish syntax rules.

In this sentence, så means so.

It appears in:

• så beskidt = so dirty
• så længe = so long

So both uses are normal:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt
  = If the pot hadn’t been so dirty
• ... skrubbet den så længe
  = ... scrubbed it for so long

The first så intensifies an adjective:

• så beskidt = so dirty
• så stor = so big
• så træt = so tired

The second så intensifies a time expression:

• så længe = so long
• så kort = so short

Because den is the pronoun referring back to gryden.

• gryde = pot
• gryden = the pot

Since gryde is a common gender noun in Danish, the pronoun is den.

So:

• Jeg skrubbede gryden. = I scrubbed the pot.
• Jeg skrubbede den. = I scrubbed it.

If the noun were neuter, Danish would usually use det instead.

Example:

• bordet (the table) → det
• gryden (the pot) → den

Because gryden is the definite form: the pot.

• en gryde = a pot
• gryden = the pot

Danish usually marks definiteness by adding an ending to the noun:

• en bil → bilen
• en bog → bogen
• en gryde → gryden

Here the speaker means a specific pot, not just any pot. That is why the definite form is used.

Not exactly.

skrubbe means to scrub — to clean something by rubbing hard, usually because it is quite dirty.

So:

• vaske = wash
• rengøre = clean
• skrubbe = scrub

Using skrubbe suggests effort, friction, and probably a stubborn mess.

That fits well with:

• så beskidt = so dirty
• så længe = for so long

So the sentence suggests the pot needed a lot of hard cleaning.

Here så længe means so long or for so long, referring to duration.

• ... have skrubbet den så længe
  = ... have scrubbed it for so long

Yes, så længe can also appear in expressions related to as long as, but that depends on context.

Compare:

• Jeg ventede så længe. = I waited so long.
• Så længe du er her, er alt godt. = As long as you are here, everything is fine.

In your sentence, it clearly means for such a long time, not as long as.

That would change the meaning.

• ville ikke have skrubbet = would not have scrubbed
  This refers to an imagined past result.
• ville ikke skrubbe = would not scrub / would be unwilling to scrub
  This sounds more like a present/future or general meaning.

Because the sentence is about a past hypothetical situation, Danish needs:

• ville + have + past participle

So ville ikke have skrubbet is the correct form here.

Hvis is the normal word for if in a conditional sentence.

So:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt ...
  = If the pot had not been so dirty ...

This is the standard way to introduce a condition in Danish.

Examples:

• Hvis det regner, bliver jeg hjemme. = If it rains, I’m staying home.
• Hvis jeg havde haft tid, var jeg kommet. = If I had had time, I would have come.

It is actually quite close to English, which is helpful for learners.

Roughly:

• Hvis = If
• gryden = the pot
• ikke havde været = had not been
• så beskidt = so dirty
• ville jeg ikke have skrubbet = I would not have scrubbed
• den = it
• så længe = so long / for so long

The biggest differences from English are:

1. Word order

   • Danish uses inversion after the fronted if-clause:
     ..., ville jeg ...
   • English keeps:
     ..., I would ...

2. Negation placement

   • Danish ikke follows Danish syntax rules, which are not always identical to English not.

3. Definite nouns

   • Danish often adds definiteness to the end of the noun:
     gryden = the pot

So the overall logic is familiar, but the grammar details matter.

You could say:

• Jeg ville ikke have skrubbet gryden så længe, hvis den ikke havde været så beskidt.

That means the same thing.

A few things change:

• The main clause now comes first, so you get normal order:
  • Jeg ville ... not
  • ville jeg ...
• The pronoun in the if-clause becomes den, because gryden was already mentioned in the main clause.

So both versions are natural:

• Hvis gryden ikke havde været så beskidt, ville jeg ikke have skrubbet den så længe.
• Jeg ville ikke have skrubbet gryden så længe, hvis den ikke havde været så beskidt.