Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Jeg stoler på henne når hun sier ifra.

Norwegian uses the fixed verb–preposition combination å stole på to mean “to trust” or “to rely on.” You must include på before the person or thing you trust. Without på, stole doesn’t take a direct object.

Correct: Jeg stoler på henne.
Incorrect: Jeg stoler henne.

Why is it henne and not hun?

Hun is the subject form (she). Henne is the object form (her). After a preposition like på, you need the object form:

Jeg stoler på henne.
Subject example: Hun er snill.

What’s the difference between å stole på noen, å tro noen, and å tro på noen?

å stole på noen = to trust someone (their reliability/character). Example: Jeg stoler på henne.
å tro noen = to believe someone (to accept what they say as true). Example: Jeg tror henne.
å tro på noen = to believe in someone (have faith in them), or in the existence of something. Examples: Jeg tror på henne. / Jeg tror på Gud.

What does når do here, and how is it different from da?

Når introduces a time clause meaning “when/whenever,” often used for present, future, or repeated events. Da is used for a single event in the past.

Habitual/general: Jeg stoler på henne når hun sier ifra.
One specific past event: Jeg stolte på henne da hun sa ifra.

Could I use hvis or om instead of når?

You can, but the meaning shifts from time to condition.

når = “when/whenever” (time/habit): … når hun sier ifra.
hvis/om = “if” (condition): Jeg stoler på henne hvis/om hun sier ifra (I trust her provided that she speaks up). Use this if you mean a condition, not timing or habit.

Is the word order in når hun sier ifra correct? Why isn’t it inverted?

Yes. In subordinate clauses (like those introduced by når), Norwegian does not use main-clause inversion. The normal order is Subject–Verb–(Objects/Adverbs):

når hun sier ifra (Subject = hun, Verb = sier). If you move the whole time clause first, the main clause shows inversion:
Når hun sier ifra, stoler jeg på henne.

Where would I put ikke (not)?

In the main clause: after the finite verb. Example: Jeg stoler ikke på henne når hun sier ifra.
In the subordinate clause: ikke usually comes before the verb phrase: … når hun ikke sier ifra. Combined: Jeg stoler ikke på henne når hun ikke sier ifra.

Do I need a comma before når?

Not when the når-clause comes after the main clause:

Jeg stoler på henne når hun sier ifra. (no comma) But if the når-clause comes first, use a comma:
Når hun sier ifra, stoler jeg på henne.

What exactly does si(e) ifra mean?

Å si ifra/si fra is a very common idiom meaning “to speak up,” “to let (someone) know,” “to give notice,” “to complain,” etc., depending on context. It’s often about alerting or informing someone.

Imperative: Si ifra! (Let me/us know!)
With a recipient: Hun sier ifra til meg. (She lets me know.)
About something: Si ifra om feil. (Report errors.)

Is it si ifra or si fra? What about i fra or ifrå?

In Bokmål, both si ifra and si fra are accepted. Si ifra is extremely common; many style guides also accept si fra. The form i fra (two words) is old-fashioned/less recommended. Ifrå is Nynorsk. So for Bokmål, stick to si ifra or si fra.

Can I add who she tells and what she tells about?

Yes, common patterns are:

Recipient with til: Hun sier ifra til meg.
Topic with om: Hun sier ifra om problemet.
Clause with at: Hun sier ifra at hun kommer senere. More formal alternatives: gi beskjed (til/om), melde fra (til/om).

Is there a more formal way to say stoler på?

Yes, å ha tillit til is more formal/institutional:

Jeg har tillit til henne når hun sier ifra. Meaning is similar, but it sounds more official.

Can I rephrase it with an at-clause, like “I trust that she speaks up”?

Yes:

Jeg stoler på at hun sier ifra. Here you’re trusting the proposition (that she speaks up), not directly the person. Both forms are natural, with slightly different focus.

Any pitfalls with the past/past participle of stole?

Past: stolte (Jeg stolte på henne.)
Past participle: stolt (Jeg har stolt på henne.) Note: stolt also means “proud,” so context disambiguates:
Jeg er stolt av henne (I’m proud of her) vs. Jeg har stolt på henne (I have trusted her).

How do I pronounce the tricky words here?

Approximate tips (varies by dialect):

Jeg ≈ “yai” or “yeh”
stoler ≈ “STOO-ler” (long o)
på ≈ “poh” (long o)
henne ≈ “HEN-neh”
når ≈ “nor” with a long, open o
hun ≈ close front u, like French “u” in “tu”
sier ≈ “SEE-eh(r)”
ifra ≈ “ee-FRAH” (stress on second syllable)

Is ho acceptable instead of hun/henne?

Ho is common in many dialects and is standard in Nynorsk. In standard Bokmål (which your sentence uses), stick with hun/henne. A gender-neutral option increasingly used is hen:

Jeg stoler på hen når hen sier ifra.