Sign inSign up

Hun klager når reklamen avbryter filmen.

Hun klager når reklamen avbryter filmen.
She complains when the advertisement interrupts the movie.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Norwegian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Norwegian now

Questions & Answers about Hun klager når reklamen avbryter filmen.

What does the word når express here—“when” or “whenever”?
In the present tense like this, når usually means “whenever,” describing a habitual action. So the sentence talks about what she typically does each time that situation happens, not one specific occurrence.
Can I use da instead of når?

Use da for a single event in the past. For general truths, habits, and present-time conditions, use når.

  • Habit/present: Hun klager når reklamen avbryter filmen.
  • One past time: Hun klaget da reklamen avbrøt filmen.
Why is the word order når reklamen avbryter filmen and not når avbryter reklamen filmen?
In a subordinate clause introduced by når, the finite verb does not move to second position. The order is typically: subjunction + subject + (adverbs) + verb + objects. So: når [reklamen] [avbryter] [filmen] is correct. The inverted order would be for a main clause, not a subordinate one.
What happens if I put the når-clause first?

If you front the subordinate clause, the main clause follows the V2 rule (verb in second position), and you add a comma:

  • Når reklamen avbryter filmen, klager hun. Subject and verb in the main clause invert to keep the verb second: klager hun.
Do I need a comma before når in the original sentence?
No comma is needed when the subordinate clause comes after the main clause: Hun klager når ... If the subordinate clause comes first, you do use a comma after it: Når ..., klager hun.
Why are reklamen and filmen in the definite form?
  • filmen: the specific movie being watched at that time; situationally identifiable, so the definite is natural.
  • reklamen: in TV/radio contexts, the definite singular often refers to “the commercials/ad break” as a familiar, understood phenomenon. Norwegian uses definite forms for familiar/generic referents more readily than English.
Could I use indefinite or plural instead (like en reklame or reklamene)?

Yes, depending on the nuance:

  • en reklame = a single commercial: Hun klager når en reklame avbryter filmen.
  • reklamene = the commercials (plural): Hun klager når reklamene avbryter filmen.
  • A very idiomatic option is the specific “ad break”: reklamepausen: Hun klager når reklamepausen avbryter filmen.
What exactly does reklamen refer to here?
It typically refers to the ad break/commercials that interrupt programming on TV/streaming. It can be understood as “the commercials” collectively, not necessarily one single ad.
Is klager transitive? Do I need a preposition like over or på?
  • å klage can be intransitive: Hun klager = She complains (in general).
  • To say what she complains about, use a preposition:
    • klage over/på
      • thing: Hun klager over/på reklamen.
    • klage over/på at
      • clause: Hun klager over/på at reklamen avbryter filmen.
  • To say whom she complains to, use til: Hun klager til TV-kanalen. In the given sentence, the når-clause is temporal, not the object of “klage.”
How do I say “She complains about the commercial interrupting the movie”?

Two natural options:

  • Hun klager over at reklamen avbryter filmen.
  • Hun klager på reklamen som avbryter filmen. Both are fine; over can feel a bit more formal/written; på is common in speech.
Does the present tense here mean she’s doing it right now, or that she does it habitually?

It’s habitual/generic present. To make the habitual meaning explicit, you can add hver gang:

  • Hun klager hver gang reklamen avbryter filmen. For a specific past instance, use past tense:
  • Hun klaget da reklamen avbrøt filmen.
Could I use the passive voice instead?

Yes, it’s idiomatic and shifts focus to the movie:

  • Hun klager når filmen blir avbrutt av reklamen. Both active (reklamen avbryter filmen) and passive (filmen blir avbrutt) are common.
Where does ikke go if I want to negate?
  • Negating the main clause: Hun klager ikke når reklamen avbryter filmen. (“She doesn’t complain when …”)
  • Negating the subordinate clause: Hun klager når reklamen ikke avbryter filmen. (“She complains when the commercial does not interrupt the movie.”) Note the placement: in subclauses, ikke comes before the finite verb; in main clauses, after the finite verb.
Can I use mens instead of når?

mens means “while” (simultaneous actions). You could say:

  • Hun klager mens reklamen avbryter filmen. This focuses on overlap in time and is less about the trigger/condition; når is the natural choice for “whenever/when (it happens).”
What’s the difference between når and hvis here?
  • når = when/whenever (temporal; assumes the event does occur): Hun klager når reklamen avbryter filmen.
  • hvis = if (conditional; the event may or may not occur): Hun klager hvis reklamen avbryter filmen. Both can be used, but når suggests a regular, expected situation.
How do I pronounce the tricky parts?
  • Hun: [hoon] (short u; English “oo” but shorter).
  • klager: stress on the first syllable; hard g: KLAH-ger.
  • når: long vowel like English “nor” with a tapped/trilled r.
  • reklamen: stress on the second syllable: re-KLA-men.
  • avbryter: stress on AV-; y is a front rounded vowel (like German ü): AV-bry-ter.
  • filmen: FIL-men; clear l, tapped/trilled r not present here.