Learn Hardcore Norwegian: Instruktøren sier at vi skal strekke armene sakte opp mot taket. - The instructor says that we shall stretch our arms slowly up toward the ceiling.

This is the normal way to refer to a specific, known person in Norwegian. You only say instruktør without the -en ending if you mean it in a more general way (e.g. Jeg er instruktør – I am an instructor).

What does skal mean here, and why not vil or kommer til å?

In this sentence, skal expresses instruction / intention / planned action, not just future time.

vi skal strekke armene … = we are to stretch / we should stretch / we’re supposed to stretch our arms …

Rough comparison:

skal – often duty, plan, or instructions:
- Vi skal trene i dag. = We are going to work out today / we’re supposed to work out today.
vil – wants or willingness (and sometimes future in some dialects):
- Vi vil trene. = We want to work out.
kommer til å – more neutral prediction about the future:
- Vi kommer til å trene i dag. = We will (probably) work out today.

Because this is something the instructor is telling you to do, skal is the natural choice.

Why is there an at in sier at vi skal strekke …? Can you drop it like English sometimes drops “that”?

Here, at is a subordinating conjunction meaning “that”. It introduces an indirect speech clause:

Instruktøren sier at … = The instructor says that …

Unlike English, you cannot normally drop at in standard written Norwegian.
So:

✅ Instruktøren sier at vi skal strekke armene …
❌ Instruktøren sier vi skal strekke armene … (informally heard in some speech, but not recommended for learners in writing)

Use at when you could say “that” in English and you are introducing a full clause with a subject and verb.

Why is it vi skal strekke and not an infinitive like sier å strekke?

In Norwegian, sier does not take å + infinitive the way English often uses “says to …”.

To express “says to stretch”, Norwegian usually uses an indirect statement with at and a clause:

Instruktøren sier at vi skal strekke armene …
= The instructor says (that) we should stretch our arms …

If you want a more direct “tells us to stretch”, you normally change the verb:

Instruktøren sier til oss at vi skal strekke armene … (says to us that we should …)
Instruktøren ber oss om å strekke armene … (asks us to stretch our arms …)

But plain sier å strekke is not idiomatic Norwegian.

Why is there no our in strekke armene? Why not strekke armene våre?

Norwegian often omits possessive pronouns (my, your, our, etc.) when the body part belongs obviously to the subject:

Jeg vasker hendene. = I wash my hands.
Hun lukker øynene. = She closes her eyes.

So here:

vi skal strekke armene = we are going to stretch (our) arms

You can say armene våre, but it usually sounds more contrastive or emphatic, for example to distinguish our arms from someone else’s.
In instructions for physical exercise, the simple definite form (armene) is the norm.

Why is it armene and not just armer?

Armene is the definite plural form: the arms.

For most body parts in this kind of context, Norwegian uses definite form when talking about your own body:

Bøy knærne. = Bend (your) knees.
Rull skuldrene. = Roll (your) shoulders.

So:

armer = (some) arms (indefinite plural)
armene = the arms (definite plural)

In instructions and descriptions of movements, definite plural is standard.

Why is sakte placed between strekke armene and opp? Could you say strekke armene opp sakte instead?

Adverbs like sakte have some flexibility in Norwegian, but the position in the sentence you have is the most natural here:

… strekke armene sakte opp mot taket.

This order:

verb (strekke)
object (armene)
manner adverb (sakte)
direction (opp mot taket)

You can sometimes move sakte, but it may sound slightly less natural or give a different rhythm:

… strekke armene opp sakte mot taket. – possible, but less common.
… sakte strekke armene opp mot taket. – puts extra emphasis on sakte (“slowly, we are going to stretch …”).

As a learner, placing manner adverbs like sakte after the object and before direction (as in the original sentence) is a safe and natural pattern.

What is the difference between opp mot taket and opp til taket or just opp?

They each give a slightly different nuance:

opp mot taket
- literally: up towards the ceiling
- Suggests moving in the direction of the ceiling, not necessarily touching it.
- Very typical for exercise instructions.
opp til taket
- literally: up to the ceiling
- Suggests reaching all the way up to the ceiling, almost touching it or reaching that height.
- Often sounds too literal or exaggerated unless that’s really the intent.
opp (on its own)
- simply: up
- strekke armene opp is fine (and common), but adding mot taket clarifies the direction visually and more naturally for a workout context.

So opp mot taket is the idiomatic choice for “up towards the ceiling” in an exercise class.

Why is it taket and not just tak?

Again, this is the use of the definite form in Norwegian:

tak = a ceiling / ceiling (indefinite)
taket = the ceiling (definite)

In a specific room, both the speaker and listener know which ceiling we’re talking about, so Norwegian naturally uses the definite form:

Lampa henger i taket. = The lamp hangs from the ceiling.
Se opp i taket. = Look up at the ceiling.

So opp mot taket is literally up toward the ceiling.

How does the word order work in at vi skal strekke armene sakte opp mot taket? Is there a verb-second (V2) rule here?

In Norwegian:

main clauses usually have verb in second position (V2).
subordinate clauses (introduced by words like at, fordi, som) do not follow V2; the verb follows the subject.

Your phrase is a subordinate clause introduced by at:

at (subordinating conjunction)
vi (subject)
skal (finite verb)
strekke armene sakte opp mot taket (the rest of the predicate)

So the order is: [conjunction] – subject – verb – …:

at vi skal strekke armene sakte opp mot taket

This is correct for a subordinate clause.
A comparable main clause would be:

Vi skal strekke armene sakte opp mot taket.
(subject vi in first position, verb skal in second position → V2.)

Could you use langsomt instead of sakte? Is there any difference?

Both sakte and langsomt can mean “slowly”.

sakte is more common in everyday speech and in instructions like this.
langsomt can sound a bit more formal or descriptive, but it is also perfectly correct.

So you could say:

Instruktøren sier at vi skal strekke armene langsomt opp mot taket.

It’s grammatically fine, but in a fitness or yoga class, sakte feels more natural and colloquial.

How are the special Norwegian sounds in instruktøren, sier, and skal pronounced?

Key points:

ø in instruktøren
- Similar to the vowel in British English “bird” or “nurse”, but with rounded lips.
- Tongue position like “e” in “bed”, lips like “o” in “go”.
sj-sound in sier
- Actually, sier is pronounced roughly [ˈsiːər] (like “see-er”).
- The sj-sound appears in words like sju (7), skje (spoon), not in sier.
sk in skal
- In skal, the sk is a plain [sk] (like “sk” in “skip”).
- The sh-like sound ([ʃ]) only appears before front vowels (i, y, e, æ, ø) in words like skje, skjorte, skylle.
- So skal sounds roughly like “skal” with a short a, similar to “skull” but with a clearer a.