Learn Hardcore Norwegian: I framtiden håper hun å få sin drømmejobb, og hun vil ikke angre når hun innser hvor mye hun har lært. - In the future she hopes to get her dream job, and she will not regret it when she realizes how much she has learned.

å få = to get / to obtain / to receive.
After håper, you normally use å
- infinitive:
- håper å få = hopes to get.
You need the infinitive marker å:
- ✅ håper å få sin drømmejobb
- ❌ håper få sin drømmejobb (missing å)
å få seg can be used with jobs, but has a slightly different feel:
- håper å få seg en jobb = hopes to get herself a job (more casual / general).
- In your sentence, å få sin drømmejobb focuses specifically on that dream job, so få alone is natural.

Why is it sin drømmejobb and not hennes drømmejobb?

Norwegian distinguishes between:

sin / si / sitt / sine = reflexive possessives
Used when the possessor is the subject of the same clause.
hans / hennes = non‑reflexive possessives
Used when the possessor is someone else, or when you explicitly want to stress that.

In this clause:

Subject: hun
Possessed thing: drømmejobb
It is her own dream job.

So we use the reflexive form:

hun … å få sin drømmejobb = she … to get her (own) dream job

If you said:

hun … å få hennes drømmejobb

it would normally mean she hopes to get *another woman’s dream job*, not her own.

What exactly does drømmejobb mean, and why is it written as one word?

drømmejobb is a compound noun:

drømme‑ = dream‑ (from drøm, dream)
jobb = job

So drømmejobb literally means dream job.

In Norwegian, it’s very common to combine nouns (or a noun with another word) into one compound word instead of writing them separately:

drømmehus = dream house
sommerferie = summer vacation
språklærer = language teacher

Writing drømme jobb as two words would be incorrect.

Why is it vil ikke angre and not skal ikke angre or something with a future tense?

Norwegian doesn’t have a dedicated future tense like English will by default. It often uses:

vil
- infinitive
skal
- infinitive
present tense with a future meaning (from context)

In your sentence:

hun vil ikke angre ≈ she will not regret (it)

Here, vil expresses a future prediction or assumption.
skal often expresses intention, plan, or obligation, and would sound off in this context:

hun skal ikke angre → more like she is not supposed to regret / she must not regret, or I promise she won’t regret it (sounds like a guarantee or command).

So vil ikke angre is the natural choice for a simple future prediction.

Why is ikke placed between vil and angre?

In Norwegian, ikke normally goes after the finite verb in main clauses.

In hun vil ikke angre:

vil = finite verb (present tense)
ikke = negation
angre = infinitive

Typical pattern:
Subject + finite verb + ikke + infinitive / rest

More examples:

Jeg kan ikke komme. = I cannot come.
De vil ikke reise. = They will not travel.

Why is it når hun innser and not da hun innser or om hun innser?

Norwegian uses different conjunctions depending on the meaning:

når = when (time), for:
- repeated events
- present or future events
- general truths
da = when (time), but:
- only for a single event in the past
om = if / whether (condition, possibility), not simple time.

In your sentence, we’re talking about a future time:

… vil ikke angre når hun innser …
= … will not regret (it) when she realizes …

So når is correct.

da hun innser is wrong here for two reasons:

da is past‑only.
After da, you would also need a past verb: da hun innså (when she realized).

om hun innser would mean if she realizes, which changes the meaning to a conditional sentence.

Why is the verb innser in the present tense, not a future tense like in English (when she will realize)?

Norwegian generally does not use a future auxiliary (like vil) inside time clauses introduced by når.

English:

She won’t regret it *when she will realize how much she has learned. (actually, natural English prefers *when she realizes)

Norwegian:

hun vil ikke angre når hun innser hvor mye hun har lært.

So:

The main clause uses a future‑like form: vil ikke angre.
The time clause uses the present tense: når hun innser, even though the event is in the future.

This is normal Norwegian usage: present tense in når‑clauses for future time.

Why is it hvor mye hun har lært and not hvor mye har hun lært?

hvor mye hun har lært is an indirect question (or embedded question) inside a larger clause.

Direct question: Hvor mye har hun lært?
(Verb comes second → V2 word order.)
Indirect question: … når hun innser hvor mye hun har lært.
Now it’s part of a bigger sentence, and the verb does not move to second place.

So in hvor mye hun har lært:

hvor mye = question word (how much)
hun = subject
har lært = verb phrase (perfect)

Correct order in indirect questions:
question word + subject + verb …

That’s why hvor mye hun har lært is right, and
hvor mye har hun lært would be wrong in this position.

Why do we use har lært (present perfect) instead of simple past lærte?

Difference in nuance:

hun har lært mye (present perfect)
- Focus on the result up to now.
- Often implies that the learning is relevant to the present/future.
- Fits well with innser: when she realizes *how much she has learned (up to that point).*
hun lærte mye (simple past)
- Focus on a finished event in the past.
- More detached from the present.

In hvor mye hun har lært, the idea is that she will look back and see everything she has learned so far when she reaches that future point, so the present perfect is the natural tense.

Is I framtiden the only correct form, or can you also say I framtida?

Both forms exist, but:

i framtiden = more standard Bokmål spelling, slightly more formal/neutral.
i framtida = also correct Bokmål, but feels a bit more colloquial / dialectal in many areas.

They mean the same thing: in the future.

So you could also say:

I framtida håper hun å få sin drømmejobb …

and it would still be correct Norwegian.