Statsadvokaten leser rapporten.

Because -en is the common way to mark a definite singular noun in Norwegian for many masculine nouns.

• statsadvokat = a public prosecutor / district attorney
• statsadvokaten = the public prosecutor

And:

• rapport = a report
• rapporten = the report

Unlike English, Norwegian often puts the definite article at the end of the noun instead of using a separate word like the.

The basic word order is:

Subject + Verb + Object

So here:

• Statsadvokaten = subject
• leser = verb
• rapporten = object

This is the same basic order as in English:

The public prosecutor reads the report.

That makes this sentence very straightforward for an English speaker.

Leser is the present tense of the verb å lese (to read).

A very important difference from English is that Norwegian verbs usually do not change according to the subject.

So you get:

• jeg leser = I read / I am reading
• du leser = you read
• han leser = he reads
• vi leser = we read

The verb stays leser for all persons in the present tense.

It can mean either, depending on context.

So Statsadvokaten leser rapporten can mean:

• The public prosecutor reads the report
• The public prosecutor is reading the report

Norwegian often uses the simple present where English might use either simple present or present continuous. Context usually makes the intended meaning clear.

The infinitive is å lese = to read.

A common pattern is:

• å lese = infinitive
• leser = present tense
• leste = past tense
• har lest = has/have read

So leser comes directly from the verb å lese.

Because in Norwegian, definiteness is usually built into the noun itself.

English says:

• the report
• the public prosecutor

Norwegian says:

• rapporten
• statsadvokaten

The -en ending already includes the meaning of the.

So adding a separate the-word in a simple sentence like this would usually be wrong.

Yes, it is one word, because Norwegian very often forms compound nouns as a single word.

Here:

• stat = state
• advokat = lawyer / advocate
• together: statsadvokat

Then the definite form becomes:

• statsadvokaten = the public prosecutor

This is very common in Norwegian. English often writes similar ideas as two words, but Norwegian prefers one compound word.

A natural indefinite version would be:

En statsadvokat leser en rapport.

That means:

A public prosecutor is reading a report
or
A public prosecutor reads a report

Compare:

• statsadvokaten = the public prosecutor
• en statsadvokat = a public prosecutor
• rapporten = the report
• en rapport = a report

So the original sentence is definite for both nouns.

Both statsadvokat and rapport are normally treated as masculine nouns in Bokmål.

That is why you get:

• en statsadvokat
• statsadvokaten
• en rapport
• rapporten

For many learners, the important practical thing is to memorize the noun together with its article:

• en statsadvokat
• en rapport

That makes it easier to form the definite endings correctly later.

A learner-friendly approximation is something like:

STATS-ad-vo-kah-ten

A few useful points:

• ts in stats- is pronounced clearly
• the v is pronounced like an English v
• the final -en is usually lighter than English speakers expect

But pronunciation varies somewhat by speaker and dialect, so it is best to listen to native audio if possible.

Yes. In Norwegian, the verb is often in second position in main clauses, so if you move another element to the front, the subject usually comes after the verb.

For example:

• Nå leser statsadvokaten rapporten. = Now the public prosecutor is reading the report.

Notice that leser stays in second position.

But in the original neutral sentence, Statsadvokaten leser rapporten, the word order is the normal Subject + Verb + Object pattern.

Not necessarily exactly. It is often translated that way to give the general idea, but legal job titles do not always match perfectly across countries.

So for learning purposes, it is fine to understand statsadvokat as a kind of public prosecutor. Just remember that legal systems differ, so the English translation may be approximate rather than perfectly identical in every context.