Breakdown of Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
Questions & Answers about Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
At is a conjunction meaning that, and it introduces a subordinate clause that contains what he is admitting.
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig …
= He admits *that he could have been more patient …*
Many verbs of speaking, thinking, and feeling in Norwegian often take an at-clause:
- Han sier at … – He says that …
- Hun tror at … – She believes that …
- De håper at … – They hope that …
So innrømmer at corresponds closely to admits that in English.
In careful written Norwegian, you normally keep at here, so:
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig … ✅ (standard)
In informal spoken language, Norwegians very often drop at after many reporting verbs:
- Han sier (at) han kommer.
- Han innrømmer (at) han var sint.
So you will hear Han innrømmer han kunne ha vært …, but if you are writing neutral, standard Bokmål, it is safer and more natural to include at.
Because the admitting is happening now, while the discussion belongs to the past.
The structure is:
- Han innrømmer – He admits (now, present tense)
- at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen – that he could have been more patient in the discussion (referring to an earlier event)
Norwegian works the same way as English here:
- He *admits that he could have been more patient in the discussion.*
If you want to say that the admitting also happened in the past, you can say:
- Han innrømmet at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
He admitted that he could have been more patient in the discussion.
Kunne ha vært is the modal verb kunne (could) + perfect infinitive ha vært (have been). Together, they express a hypothetical or unreal situation in the past, just like English could have been.
So:
- han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig
≈ he could have been more patient
→ He was not more patient, but it would have been possible / better if he had been.
It expresses regret or missed possibility in the past, not an actual fact.
They differ in both time and formality:
kunne ha vært
- Full form: modal + ha
- past participle.
- Meaning: hypothetical / unreal past.
- Standard and clear:
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig.
He admits that he could have been more patient (but he wasn’t).
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig.
- Full form: modal + ha
kunne vært (without ha)
- Very common in speech and informal writing.
- Often understood the same as kunne ha vært.
- Many speakers use them almost interchangeably in everyday language:
- Han innrømmer at han kunne vært mer tålmodig. (very natural in speech)
kunne være
- This usually refers to a present/future possibility or a general tendency, not a specific past missed opportunity:
- Han kunne være mer tålmodig.
He could be more patient (in general / from now on / as a rule).
- Han kunne være mer tålmodig.
- This usually refers to a present/future possibility or a general tendency, not a specific past missed opportunity:
In your sentence, because we are talking about how he behaved in that specific past discussion, kunne ha vært (or colloquial kunne vært) is the correct choice.
This is a subordinate clause introduced by at, so it follows subordinate clause word order:
- Subject comes first: han
- Finite verb (modal) comes after the subject: kunne
- Other verbs come later, near the end: ha vært
- Then the rest of the phrase: mer tålmodig i diskusjonen
So we get:
at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen
You cannot use main-clause inversion (V2) after at, so:
- ✅ at han kunne ha vært …
- ❌ at kunne han ha vært … (wrong in standard Norwegian)
In Norwegian, after verbs like være (to be), bli (to become), virke (to seem), you use the adjective form, not an adverb, to describe the subject:
- Han er tålmodig. – He is patient.
- Hun virker sint. – She seems angry.
In your sentence, vært is the past participle of være, so you still describe him, not how he performed an action:
- han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig
= he could have been more patient (he, as a person, could have shown more patience)
Norwegian doesn’t make a separate -ly‑type adverb here like English patiently. The adjective tålmodig is correct.
Both patterns exist in Norwegian, but for tålmodig the usual and most natural comparative is:
- mer tålmodig – more patient
The form tålmodigere is possible but less common and can sound a bit unusual or old‑fashioned to some speakers. Many multi‑syllable adjectives prefer mer instead of the ‑ere ending:
- mer interessant (not usually interessantere)
- mer komfortabel (not usually komfortablere)
So in normal, modern Norwegian, mer tålmodig is the preferred comparative form here.
Norwegian is not a “drop‑subject” language, so each finite clause normally needs an explicit subject.
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig. ✅
- Han innrømmer at kunne ha vært mer tålmodig. ❌ (sounds wrong / incomplete)
Even when the subject of the subordinate clause is the same as in the main clause, you still repeat the pronoun:
- Jeg tror at jeg har rett. – I think (that) I am right.
- Vi vet at vi må gå. – We know (that) we must go.
So you must say at han kunne ha vært … with han included.
The definite form diskusjonen refers to a specific discussion that both speaker and listener know about (for example, the one they had yesterday).
- i diskusjonen – in the (particular) discussion
- i en diskusjon – in a discussion (any discussion / in some discussion or other)
Your sentence suggests he is talking about one known event:
- Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
= in that discussion they are already talking about.
If you change it to i en diskusjon, it sounds more generic, like talking about his behavior in a discussion (in general), not in that concrete past situation.
Several prepositions are possible, but they have slightly different nuances:
i diskusjonen
- Very common and neutral.
- Literally “in the discussion”, similar to English in the discussion / during the discussion.
under diskusjonen
- Emphasizes the time period more: “during the discussion”.
- Also correct, slightly more formal or written‑style in some contexts.
på diskusjonen
- Not idiomatic in this sense; på is not normally used with diskusjon to mean “during the discussion”.
So i diskusjonen is the most natural and standard choice for during that specific discussion.
That sounds unnatural in Norwegian. After innrømme, the normal pattern is an at‑clause, not an infinitive clause:
- ✅ Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig.
- ❌ Han innrømmer å kunne ha vært mer tålmodig.
Some verbs can take an infinitive with å:
- Han prøver å være mer tålmodig. – He tries to be more patient.
- Hun lover å komme. – She promises to come.
But innrømme (to admit) behaves like si, tro, mene, håpe and usually takes a clause with at:
- Han innrømmer at han tok feil. – He admits that he was wrong.
They focus on different aspects:
innrømmer – admits
- Focus: he is acknowledging the fact that he was not patient enough.
- Neutral about whether he feels sorry or not, though regret is often implied by context.
angrer – regrets
- Focus: his emotional reaction; he feels sorry about what he did.
Compare:
Han innrømmer at han kunne ha vært mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
= He recognizes/admit that he could have been more patient.Han angrer på at han ikke var mer tålmodig i diskusjonen.
= He regrets that he wasn’t more patient in the discussion.
So innrømmer is about admitting the truth; angrer is about feeling regret.