Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere for å trene. - The smartwatch makes me get up earlier to exercise.

(Subjekt) + får + (person i objektform) + til å + (infinitiv)
- Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp.
- Læreren fikk oss til å lese mer.
  = The teacher made us read more.

English has similar structures (make someone do, get someone to do), but Norwegian uses få … til å very systematically for this.

Why is it til å stå opp and not just å stå opp?

With the verb å få in this causative meaning, Norwegian almost always uses the pattern:

få (noen) til å (gjøre noe)

The til here belongs to this construction; it doesn’t add a separate meaning like “to” or “towards” in space. It’s just part of the grammar of få … til å.

Compare:

Jeg liker å stå opp tidlig.
(no til, because it’s just like to get up)

vs.

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidlig.
(needs til, because it’s makes me get up)

What is the difference between til å and for å in this sentence?

They play different roles:

til å (after får)
- Part of the fixed causative pattern:
- får meg til å stå opp = makes me get up
- You can’t normally replace this til with for.
for å (before trene)
- Shows purpose: in order to
- for å trene = in order to exercise / to exercise (as a purpose)

So:

… får meg til å stå opp … → grammatical requirement with få
… tidligere for å trene. → explains why you get up earlier (your goal)

Could I say Smartklokken gjør at jeg står opp tidligere for å trene instead? What’s the difference?

Yes, that’s grammatically correct:

Smartklokken gjør at jeg står opp tidligere for å trene.
= The smartwatch causes that I get up earlier to exercise.

Differences:

får meg til å stå opp
- More directly causative, like English makes me / gets me to.
- Slightly more natural and idiomatic in this everyday context.
gjør at jeg står opp
- Feels a bit more neutral or explanatory: it leads to / results in me getting up earlier.
- Common in more formal or explanatory writing.

In normal spoken language about habits, får meg til å is very natural.

Why is Smartklokken written as one word and with -en at the end?

Two things are happening:

Compound noun:
- Norwegian loves compounds, so smartklokke is smartwatch as one word.
- smart
  - klokke → smartklokke
Definite form with -en:
- Norwegian usually attaches the definite article as a suffix:
  - en klokke = a watch / a clock
  - klokken = the watch / the clock
  - en smartklokke = a smartwatch
  - smartklokken = the smartwatch

So Smartklokken = “the smartwatch” (some specific watch we already know about).

What is the nuance of tidligere? Is it just “early”?

Tidligere is the comparative form of tidlig:

tidlig = early
tidligere = earlier

So:

å stå opp tidlig = to get up early
å stå opp tidligere = to get up earlier (than before / than usual / than someone else)

In your sentence, tidligere implies a comparison with some previous or usual wake-up time.

What does stå opp literally mean, and how is it used?

Literally:

stå = to stand
opp = up

So literally “stand up”. But in everyday use:

stå opp almost always means “to get out of bed in the morning”.

Examples:

Når står du opp? = What time do you get up?
Jeg står opp klokka sju. = I get up at seven.

If you want to talk about just physically standing up from a chair, people might also use reise seg or reise seg opp, depending on the context.

Why is there an å before stå opp and not before trene?

There actually is an å before trene; it’s just part of the phrase for å:

til å stå opp → å
- stå opp
for å trene → å
- trene

Norwegian uses å + infinitive like English uses to + verb:

å stå opp = to get up
å trene = to exercise / to train

The only difference is:

til å is part of the få … til å construction,
for å is the ordinary “in order to” expression.

Could I say for å stå opp tidligere instead of til å stå opp tidligere?

Not with får meg in this structure. With få (noen) til å, til is required:

✅ Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere.
❌ Smartklokken får meg for å stå opp tidligere. (incorrect)

However, in other constructions without få, you can have for å stå opp as a purpose clause:

Jeg legger meg tidligere for å stå opp tidlig.
= I go to bed earlier in order to get up early.

So:

With få (noen) → til å
With purpose, no få → for å

Why isn’t it får meg selv til å stå opp (“makes myself get up”)?

You normally don’t add selv (self) in this causative construction unless you want to emphasize something special.

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere.
= The smartwatch makes me get up earlier. (normal, neutral)
Smartklokken får meg selv til å stå opp tidligere.
This would sound like you are contrasting yourself with others:
- …makes me myself get up earlier (not someone else).

So in ordinary sentences, meg is enough. Using meg selv would sound unusual or overly emphatic here.

Can the word order be changed, for example putting tidligere earlier in the sentence?

There is some flexibility, but not all orders are equally natural.

Your original:

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere for å trene.
→ very natural.

Possible, but a bit more marked:

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp for å trene tidligere.
- Now it can sound like “to work out earlier”, not necessarily “get up earlier”.
- The tidligere tends to modify what it is closest to.

You generally want:

tidligere right after the verb phrase it modifies:
- stå opp tidligere
- trene tidligere

So keep tidligere close to stå opp if the getting up is what’s earlier.

Why do we use for å trene and not just å trene?

For å + infinitive expresses purpose:

for å trene = in order to exercise / to exercise (as the goal)

If you remove for, it changes the function of the verb phrase:

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere å trene.
→ incorrect; Norwegian doesn’t link two infinitives like this with just å in that position.

You could rephrase with two separate infinitives, but you’d usually need a conjunction:

Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp tidligere og trene mer.
= The smartwatch makes me get up earlier and exercise more.

So for å clearly shows “this is the reason / purpose”.

How is får conjugated, and what tense is it here?

Får is the present tense of the verb å få.

Basic forms of å få:

å få = to get / to receive / to be allowed to / to make (causative)
får = present
fikk = past
har fått = present perfect
hadde fått = past perfect

In your sentence:

får = present tense → makes / gets (me to)

Examples:

Jeg får en gave. = I get a present.
Jeg fikk en gave. = I got a present.
Smartklokken får meg til å stå opp. = The smartwatch makes me get up.

Is for å trene more like “to train” (as in sports) or “to exercise” (work out)?

In everyday Norwegian:

å trene usually means “to exercise / work out / train (physically)”.

It can also mean to practice in sports:

Han trener fotball. = He trains football / He practices football.

In this context with stå opp tidligere, for å trene is best understood as:

to exercise / to work out.

If you wanted “to practice” something non-physical (like piano), you’d more likely use øve:

for å øve piano = in order to practice piano.