Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden. - War stories he cannot bear to read about in the evening.

Norwegian main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb (here orker) must come in second position, but the first position can be almost anything (subject, object, adverbial, etc.).

The neutral word order would be:

Han orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier om kvelden.
(Subject first: Han, verb second: orker)

In the given sentence, the object is moved to the front for emphasis or contrast:

Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden.

Here the structure is:

Krigshistorier (first element / topic: what we’re talking about)
orker (finite verb – must be in second position)
han (subject)
ikke (negation)
å lese om om kvelden (the rest of the verb phrase)

So starting with Krigshistorier is a way to highlight war stories as the topic:
War stories, he doesn’t have the energy to read about in the evenings.

Is the word order Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om really natural in Norwegian?

Yes, it is natural and idiomatic.

Two things are happening:

Topicalization / fronting: The object krigshistorier is moved to the front to be the topic or for emphasis.
V2 is still respected:
- First slot: Krigshistorier
- Second slot: orker (finite verb)
- Then: han (subject) + ikke (negation) + rest

Comparable English structure:

War stories he can’t bear to read about in the evening.

So this kind of fronting is normal, especially in spoken Norwegian or in written Norwegian with a slightly more narrative or expressive style.

Why are there two om in a row in lese om om kvelden? Are both really needed?

Yes, both om are needed, but they have different functions:

First om in lese om = about
- å lese om noe = to read about something
Second om in om kvelden = in / during (the) (as a time expression)
- om kvelden ≈ in the evening / in the evenings

So:

å lese om = to read about
om kvelden = in the evening(s)

They just happen to be the same word on the surface, but grammatically they are parts of two different phrases.

Can I rewrite the sentence to avoid that double om?

Yes, several natural alternatives avoid om om right next to each other. For example:

Change om kvelden to på kvelden:
- Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om på kvelden.
Use a different time expression:
- Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om på kveldstid.
- Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om seint på kvelden.
Go back to neutral word order:
- Han orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier om kvelden.

The original with om om is still grammatical; many Norwegians would accept or produce it in speech. Rephrasing just avoids a slightly clunky sound.

What exactly does orker mean here? Is it the same as can’t or doesn’t want to?

Orker is related to having (enough) energy/strength or mental capacity to do something.

Han orker ikke …
= He doesn’t have the energy / can’t bear / doesn’t have the strength (mental or physical) to …

Nuance compared to other verbs:

kan ikke = cannot (lack of ability, permission, or possibility)
- Han kan ikke lese om kvelden.
  He is unable / not allowed to read in the evening.
gidder ikke = can’t be bothered / can’t be arsed
- Han gidder ikke å lese om krigshistorier.
  He can’t be bothered to read about war stories.
orker ikke = doesn’t have the energy / finds it too exhausting or emotionally heavy
- Han orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier.
  It’s too much for him; he doesn’t have the mental strength for it.

In this sentence, it usually suggests that war stories in the evening feel too heavy or draining, not simply that he lacks time or permission.

Why do we say orker han ikke and not han ikke orker?

Because of the V2 word order rule in Norwegian main clauses:

The finite verb (here orker) must be in second position.
If something other than the subject is in first position (here Krigshistorier), the verb still has to come second.

So:

Krigshistorier orker han ikke … ✅
1. Krigshistorier (first position)
2. orker (finite verb – must be second)
3. han (subject)
4. ikke

But:

Krigshistorier han ikke orker … ❌
The verb is no longer in second position, so it sounds wrong to native speakers.

In a neutral order with the subject first, you still see V2:

Han orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier om kvelden.
1. Han (subject – first)
2. orker (finite verb – second)
3. ikke (negation)
4. rest of the sentence

Why is there å lese after orker? When do we use å + infinitive like that?

In Norwegian, many verbs take another verb as a complement in the form å + infinitive.

Orke is one of those verbs:

Han orker ikke å lese …
= He doesn’t have the energy to read …

Other common verbs that use å + infinitive:

å prøve å lese – to try to read
å begynne å lese – to begin to read
å love å lese – to promise to read
å like å lese – to like to read

Compare this with modal verbs, which normally take a bare infinitive (without å):

Han kan lese. (not kan å lese)
Han vil lese.
Han skal lese.

So:

After orker, you must use å + infinitive: å lese.
After modals like kan, må, vil, skal, bør, you drop å.

Is it okay to separate lese from om krigshistorier, like in Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om?

Yes. This is similar to preposition stranding in English:

English: War stories he can’t bear to read about.
Norwegian: Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om.

The basic structure without fronting would be:

Han orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier.

When you front krigshistorier, you leave a “gap” after om, and the preposition om stays with lese:

Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om.

This is fully acceptable in Norwegian. If you wanted to avoid stranding, you could front the whole prepositional phrase instead:

Om krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om kvelden.
(About war stories, he doesn’t have the energy to read in the evening.)

But the given sentence with lese om … and fronted krigshistorier is normal and close to natural English word order in similar emphasis constructions.

Why is there no article in krigshistorier? When would I say krigshistoriene?

Krigshistorier is indefinite plural: war stories (in general).

krigshistorie – a war story (singular, indefinite)
krigshistorier – war stories (plural, indefinite, no article)
krigshistorien – the war story (singular, definite)
krigshistoriene – the war stories (plural, definite)

In the sentence, he is talking about war stories in general, not some specific ones:

Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden.
≈ War stories, he doesn’t have the energy to read about in the evening.

If he meant some particular, known war stories, you would expect:

Krigshistoriene orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden.
= Those specific war stories, he can’t bear to read about in the evening.

So: no article + plural ending is the normal way to express plural indefinite in Norwegian.

What does om kvelden mean exactly – in the evening or in the evenings?

Om kvelden most often means something like in the evenings / in the evening as a rule, i.e. a habitual or typical time, not one single, unique evening.

Examples:

Jeg trener om morgenen.
= I work out in the mornings.
Vi ser på TV om kvelden.
= We watch TV in the evenings.

It can also refer to a general time frame on a particular day (“during the evening”), but it naturally suggests something that is typical or recurrent.

På kvelden is also common and can often be used with very similar meaning. Rough rule of thumb:

om kvelden – slightly more “general / habitual”
på kvelden – can feel a bit more like a specific evening, but usage overlaps a lot, and many speakers use them almost interchangeably.

Could I drop han and say Krigshistorier orker ikke å lese om om kvelden?

No, that would be ungrammatical in standard Norwegian. You normally must have an explicit subject in such a clause.

Norwegian does not usually allow dropping a subject pronoun like han the way some languages do.

So:

Krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden. ✅
Krigshistorier orker ikke å lese om om kvelden. ❌ (sounds like the subject is missing)

You can omit han only if it is understood from a previous clause and structurally shared, for example:

Han jobber mye, men krigshistorier orker han ikke å lese om om kvelden. ✅
(Same subject han applies to both, but it is only omitted in the second clause if there is clear coordination:
Han jobber mye, men orker ikke å lese om krigshistorier om kvelden.)

In your single, standalone sentence, han must be present.