Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Kan vi stole på at leveringen kommer i kveld? - Can we trust that the delivery will arrive this evening?

No. å stole (på) means to trust (in). The verb for “to steal” is å stjele (preterite stjal, past participle stjålet). Here, stole på = “trust, rely on.”

Why do we need the preposition på after stole?

stole på is a fixed prepositional verb that means “to trust (in).” You must say stole på noe/noen or stole på at + clause. Examples:

Jeg stoler på deg. = I trust you.
Vi stoler på at han kommer. = We trust that he is coming.

You can’t say stole without på in this meaning.

Why is it at and not om?

Use at to introduce a content clause (that-clause) stating something you consider true: stole på at ... = “trust that ...”.
Use om for indirect yes/no questions or wondering: lurer på om ... = “wonder if ...”.
So: stole på at leveringen kommer ..., but lurer på om leveringen kommer ....

What’s the word order inside the at-clause (at leveringen kommer i kveld)?

In Norwegian subordinate clauses (with at), the finite verb does not do V2 inversion. The basic order is Subject–(adverbs/negation)–Verb–(other elements):

at leveringen kommer i kveld
With negation: at leveringen ikke kommer i kveld

Why present tense (kommer) for a future event (“this evening”)?

Norwegian often uses the present tense for near or planned future: Han kommer i kveld. Alternatives and nuances:

skal komme: planned/arranged (intention/plan)
kommer til å komme: prediction/likelihood
vil komme: willingness or sometimes prediction (less common in this sense than in English)
Passive option: det blir levert i kveld = it will be delivered this evening

Why is it definite leveringen and not levering or en levering?

Because the delivery is specific and known in context. Norwegian marks definiteness with a suffix:

Indefinite: en levering = a delivery
Definite: leveringen = the delivery (this expected one)

In Bokmål, feminine forms are also possible for many -ing nouns, so some speakers would say leveringa (see also Nynorsk below).

Can I drop at like English sometimes drops “that”?

Not here. After stole på, if the complement is a clause, you keep at: stole på at ....
You can drop at after some verbs like tro (at) in informal speech, but with the preposition på, omitting at is not standard: stole på han kommer sounds wrong. Keep at.

Is Kan vi stole på leveringen i kveld? also correct?

Grammatically it’s possible, but it changes the meaning. Without at + clause, stole på leveringen means “trust the delivery (as an entity/service)”—ambiguous and odd here. To express trust that it will arrive tonight, use stole på at leveringen kommer i kveld or a synonym like regne med at.

What are natural synonyms for stole på at?

regne med at: count on, expect as likely — Kan vi regne med at leveringen kommer i kveld?
forvente at: expect (a bit stronger/formal) — Vi forventer at ...
tro at: believe that (weaker) — Tror du at ...?
ha tillit til at: have confidence that (formal) — Har vi tillit til at ...?
More colloquial: satse på at (“bank on/hope that”), a bit casual.

How does negation work here?

Negate the main clause: Kan vi ikke stole på at leveringen kommer i kveld? = Can’t we trust that...?
Negate the subordinate clause: Kan vi stole på at leveringen ikke kommer i kveld? = Can we trust that it won’t come tonight? Note the placement: in subclauses, ikke precedes the verb; in main clauses with inversion, ikke follows the subject: Kan vi ikke ... / Kan vi virkelig ...

Why is the question formed with inversion (Kan vi ...)?

Yes/no questions in Norwegian typically invert the verb and subject (V1). With a modal, put the modal first:

Declarative: Vi kan stole på at ...
Question: Kan vi stole på at ...?

Any pronunciation tips?

stole: the o is long, like “stoo-le” [ˈstuːlə]; stress on the first syllable.
på: long vowel [poː].
leveringen: stress on -ve- or -ri- depending on dialect; -ing- is like “sing” [ŋ]; final -en is a separate syllable.
kveld: typically the d is silent; sounds like “kvel” [kvɛl].
vi: [viː]; kommer: often [ˈkɔmːər] (geminate m).

What would this look like in Nynorsk (or with feminine forms)?

Nynorsk: Kan vi/me lita på at leveringa kjem i kveld?
Bokmål with feminine noun: Kan vi stole på at leveringa kommer i kveld? Nynorsk prefers lita på instead of stole på, and uses kjem for kommer.

Could I use a passive about the delivery?

Yes, if you want to focus on the event rather than the “delivery” as subject:

Kan vi stole på at det blir levert i kveld? = Can we trust that it will be delivered tonight? This can sound a bit more neutral/impersonal.

Is i kveld exactly “tonight”? What about i natt or på kvelden?

i kveld = this evening (roughly after late afternoon until night)
i natt = tonight (the night-time period)
på kvelden = in the evenings (habitual/general), not this specific evening
i aften exists but is old-fashioned/poetic; i kveld is standard.

What are the forms of stole and the gender/inflection of levering?

stole (to trust): å stole – stoler – stolte – har stolt; imperative Stol på meg!
levering (delivery): in Bokmål usually masculine (also accepts feminine)
- Masc: en levering – leveringen – leveringer – leveringene
- Fem (also accepted in Bokmål): ei levering – leveringa – levering(er) – leveringane
- Nynorsk uses feminine: ei levering – leveringa

Should there be a comma before at?

No. Norwegian normally does not use a comma before at in a sentence like this: Kan vi stole på at ... (no comma).

Does Kunne vi stole på at ... change the tone?

Yes. Kunne vi ... (past of the modal used “tentatively”) sounds more polite/softer or hypothetical: “Could we trust that ...?” It’s common for making a request or sounding less direct.