Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg hvor viktig familien var for meg. - When I lived alone, I discovered how important the family was to me.

Use da for a single, completed event or time period in the past.
- Da jeg var liten, bodde jeg på landet. = When I was little, I lived in the countryside.
Use når for:
- general/repeated events in the past:
  - Når jeg var hos bestemor, fikk jeg alltid kake. = Whenever I was at grandma’s, I always got cake.
- present or future:
  - Når jeg blir ferdig, ringer jeg deg. = When I’m finished, I’ll call you.

In your sentence, we’re talking about one specific period in the past (the time when I lived alone), so da is the correct choice.
Når jeg bodde alene, ... would sound odd or suggest a more “whenever I lived alone” type of meaning, which doesn’t really fit.

Why is there a comma after Da jeg bodde alene?

Norwegian uses a comma to separate a subordinate clause from the main clause, especially when the subordinate clause comes first.

Da jeg bodde alene, = subordinate clause (can’t stand alone)
oppdaget jeg hvor viktig familien var for meg. = main clause (can stand alone)

So the comma is required by standard Norwegian comma rules:

Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg ...
If you reverse the order, you usually don’t put a comma:
- Jeg oppdaget hvor viktig familien var for meg da jeg bodde alene.

Why is it oppdaget jeg and not jeg oppdaget after the comma?

This is because of the V2 rule in Norwegian main clauses:
the finite verb (here: oppdaget) must be the second element in the clause.

In your sentence, the entire subordinate clause Da jeg bodde alene has been moved to the front, before the main clause. That whole chunk counts as element 1. Therefore:

Element 1: Da jeg bodde alene,
Element 2: oppdaget (finite verb)
Element 3: jeg (subject)
Rest: hvor viktig familien var for meg.

That’s why you get:

Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg ... (correct)
Da jeg bodde alene, jeg oppdaget ... (wrong in standard Norwegian)

If you start with the subject instead, you get normal SVO order:

Jeg oppdaget hvor viktig familien var for meg da jeg bodde alene.

Why is it Da jeg bodde alene and not Da bodde jeg alene before the comma?

These two are actually different structures:

Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg ...
- Da is a subordinating conjunction meaning when.
- It introduces a subordinate clause with normal S–V order:
  - Subject: jeg
  - Verb: bodde
- This whole clause depends on the main clause.
Da bodde jeg alene.
- Here Da is a time adverb meaning then/at that time.
- This is a full main clause, with V2 word order:
  - Da (adverb) = element 1
  - bodde (verb) = element 2
  - jeg (subject) = element 3

So:

Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg ... = When I lived alone, I discovered ...
Da bodde jeg alene. = Then I lived alone. (a stand‑alone statement)

In your sentence, we need a subordinate “when”‑clause, so we use Da jeg bodde alene.

Why are all the verbs in the past tense: bodde, oppdaget, var? Could I say har oppdaget or use present tense?

The sentence describes a situation in the past and a discovery that happened then, so preterite (simple past) is natural:

bodde = lived (resided)
oppdaget = discovered
var = was

This fits a story/narration about a finished period of your life.

Other versions are possible with a slightly different focus:

Da jeg bodde alene, har jeg oppdaget hvor viktig familien er for meg. –
This is not correct: in standard Norwegian you don’t mix da + preterite with har oppdaget like that.
Da jeg bodde alene, har jeg oppdaget hvor viktig familien var for meg. –
Also unnatural for the same reason.
To use present perfect correctly, you usually make the whole thing more “present-related”, e.g.:
- Jeg har oppdaget hvor viktig familien er for meg. = I have discovered how important my family is to me.
  (no da‑clause, more about a result that still matters now)
You could say in past but still imply it’s true now:
- Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg hvor viktig familien er for meg.
  - Discovery in the past (oppdaget),
  - but the importance is still true now (er).

So your original sentence is a normal narrative about the past using simple past.

What’s the difference between bodde and levde? Why is it bodde alene?

Norwegian has two different verbs that both translate to “live” in English:

å bo – to live/reside (in a place)
- Used for where you live, your housing situation, roommates, etc.
- Examples:
  - Jeg bor i Oslo. = I live in Oslo.
  - Han bodde i et lite hus. = He lived in a small house.
å leve – to live (be alive), to live a life
- Used about being alive, lifestyle, way of living.
- Examples:
  - Jeg vil leve lenge. = I want to live a long time.
  - Hun lever et enkelt liv. = She lives a simple life.

Da jeg bodde alene focuses on your living arrangement: you had your own place, no one else lived with you.
You could say Da jeg levde alene, but it would sound more dramatic or philosophical, like “when I lived my life alone (without others in my life)” rather than “when I lived by myself (no roommates/family in the same home)”.

For ordinary “I lived alone (in my apartment)”, bodde alene is the natural choice.

How does hvor viktig work here? Why is it hvor viktig familien var and not hvor familien var viktig?

The phrase hvor viktig familien var for meg corresponds to English “how important my family was to me”.

Key points:

hvor + adjective = “how + adjective” in this kind of clause
- hvor viktig = how important
- hvor stor = how big
- hvor glad = how happy
The rest of the clause keeps normal subordinate-clause word order:
- Statement: Familien var viktig for meg.
- With hvor in front: hvor viktig familien var for meg.
In subordinate clauses, Norwegian does not use V2 word order, so you don’t say:
- ✗ hvor viktig var familien for meg (that’s like a direct question)
- ✗ hvor familien var viktig for meg (wrong word order with hvor)

So the structure is:

hvor (how)
viktig (adjective)
familien (subject)
var (verb)
for meg (prepositional phrase)

Why is it familien and not just familie or familien min?

In Norwegian, definite singular is often used where English uses “my X”, especially for close family, body parts, etc.:

familien literally = the family
But in context, it very naturally means “my family”.

Subtle differences:

Familien var viktig for meg.
- Usually understood as “My family was important to me” from context.
Familien min var viktig for meg.
- Explicit “my family”. You might use this if you want to stress the contrast with someone else’s family, or just be very clear.
Min familie var viktig for meg.
- Also possible, but less common word order in everyday speech; can sound a bit more formal or emphatic.

If you say just familie without the article:

Familie er viktig. = Family is important (family in general, as a concept)

In your sentence, familien is natural and idiomatic for “my family”, especially since it’s already clear we’re talking about my feelings (for meg).

Why do we say viktig for meg and not viktig til meg?

The preposition for is the normal one with viktig:

viktig for meg/deg/oss = important to me/you/us

Til is usually used for movement or direction (to someone/something) or for giving something:

Gi boka til meg. = Give the book to me.
Han går til skolen. = He walks to school.

But til is not used with viktig in this meaning.
So:

✔ viktig for meg (correct)
✗ viktig til meg (wrong)

Other common patterns with for:

Det betyr mye for meg. = It means a lot to me.
Dette er vanskelig for henne. = This is difficult for her.

Can the position of alene change? Could I say something like Jeg alene bodde or Da jeg bodde for meg selv?

In your sentence, bodde alene is the natural word order:

Jeg bodde alene. = I lived alone.

About alternatives:

Jeg alene bodde ...
- Very marked and unnatural in everyday Norwegian.
- Might appear in poetry or very old-fashioned style, but you shouldn’t use it in normal speech or writing.
Da jeg bodde for meg selv, ...
- This is a good and natural alternative.
- for meg selv = by myself / on my own
- Slight nuance: alene focuses directly on being alone; for meg selv can feel a little more idiomatic, like “on my own”.
You can also add emphasis:
- Da jeg bodde helt alene, oppdaget jeg ... = When I lived completely alone, I discovered ...

So bodde alene and bodde for meg selv are both correct; Jeg alene bodde is not normal modern Norwegian.

Do I really need to repeat jeg in the second clause? Could I say Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget hvor viktig familien var for meg?

You must include the subject jeg in the main clause:

✔ Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget jeg hvor viktig familien var for meg.
✗ Da jeg bodde alene, oppdaget hvor viktig familien var for meg.

Norwegian is not a “pro-drop” language like Spanish or Italian; you generally cannot omit subject pronouns in finite clauses.

Each finite clause needs its own subject (except in some very specific constructions). So even if both clauses refer to the same “I”, you must say jeg again in the main clause.