Han er ikke vant til å se sin egen puls, men han liker å følge med på søvnkvaliteten.

He is not used to seeing his own pulse, but he likes to keep track of the sleep quality.

Breakdown of Han er ikke vant til å se sin egen puls, men han liker å følge med på søvnkvaliteten.

• han: he
• se: to see
• å: to
• men: but
• like: to like
• ikke: not
• sin: his
• egen: own
• være vant til å: to be used to
• pulsen: the pulse
• søvnkvaliteten: the sleep quality
• følge med på: to keep track of

Questions & Answers about Han er ikke vant til å se sin egen puls, men han liker å følge med på søvnkvaliteten.

In "Han er ikke vant til å se ...", what does "vant til å" mean, and how is it used?

"å være vant til (noe / å gjøre noe)" means “to be used to (something / doing something)”.

Structure:

• er vant til + noun
  
  • Han er vant til kulde. = He is used to cold.
• er vant til å + infinitive
  
  • Han er vant til å jobbe sent. = He is used to working late.

You need:

• til because it’s part of the fixed expression vant til
• å because a verb in infinitive after a preposition (here: til) normally takes å:
  
  • vant til å se, gleder seg til å komme, har lyst til å spise, etc.

Forms like "vant å se" or "vant til se" are ungrammatical in this meaning.

Why is it "sin egen puls" and not "hans puls"?

Norwegian distinguishes between:

• sin / sitt / sine = reflexive possessive
  Used when the owner is the subject of the same clause.
• hans / hennes = non‑reflexive possessive
  Usually means someone else’s (another male’s / female’s).

In "Han er ikke vant til å se sin egen puls":

• Subject = Han (he)
• Possessor of the pulse = the same “he”
• So you use sin (reflexive, his own) → sin puls.

If you said:

• Han er ikke vant til å se *hans puls, it would normally mean
  *“He is not used to seeing another man’s pulse.”

What does "egen" add in "sin egen puls"?

"egen" means “own” and adds emphasis:

• sin puls = his pulse
• sin egen puls = his own pulse (highlighting that the pulse belongs to him, not someone else)

You can often drop egen without changing the basic meaning, but egen makes it more explicit or contrastive:

• Han så sin puls. (He saw his pulse.)
• Han så sin egen puls. (He saw his own pulse — not another person’s.)

Why is the word order "Han er ikke vant ..." and not "Han er vant ikke ..."?

In Norwegian main clauses, ikke usually comes after the finite (conjugated) verb:

• Finite verb = er
• So: Han er ikke vant ...

General pattern:

• Han *er ikke trøtt.*
• Han *kan ikke svømme. (finite verb = *kan)
• Han *har ikke sett filmen. (finite verb = *har)

"Han er vant ikke ..." is not standard word order in Norwegian.

What does the expression "å følge med på" mean here?

"å følge med på (noe)" means roughly “to keep track of / to monitor / to keep an eye on (something)”.

In the sentence:

• "han liker å følge med på søvnkvaliteten"
  → he likes to monitor / keep track of the sleep quality.

Other examples:

• Jeg følger med på nyhetene. = I follow the news.
• Hun følger med på aksjemarkedet. = She keeps an eye on the stock market.

You can also have "følge med" alone:

• Følg med! = Pay attention! / Follow along!

Why is it "søvnkvaliteten" (definite form) and not just "søvnkvalitet"?

"søvnkvaliteten" is the definite singular form: the sleep quality.

Norwegian often uses the definite form for things that are:

• specific to the person being talked about, or
• understood from context.

Here, "søvnkvaliteten" naturally refers to his sleep quality (over time). It’s like saying:

• He likes to track *the quality of his sleep.*

Using the indefinite:

• Han liker å følge med på søvnkvalitet
  would sound more like talking about sleep quality in general, as a concept, not his own measured sleep quality.

Could you also say "sin søvnkvalitet" instead of "søvnkvaliteten"?

Yes, you could say:

• Han liker å følge med på sin søvnkvalitet.

This would be understood and is grammatically correct. Nuance:

• søvnkvaliteten
  = the sleep quality; context usually makes it clear it’s his.
• sin søvnkvalitet
  = explicitly “his own sleep quality”, with reflexive sin.

Both are fine; the version in the sentence sounds very natural and slightly more neutral.

Why is "å" used twice: "til å se" and "å følge med"?

There are two separate infinitive constructions:

1. vant til å se

   • til is a preposition.
   • After a preposition when you use a verb, you normally need å + infinitive:
     
     • vant til å se, gleder meg til å møte deg, etc.

2. liker å følge med

   • liker is a verb that’s often followed by å + infinitive:
     
     • liker å lese, liker å lage mat, etc.

So:

• til
  • å se
• liker
  • å følge med

They just happen to occur in the same sentence.

What is the tense and aspect of "Han er ikke vant til å se ..." in English terms?

Grammatically, Norwegian uses present tense (er).

In English, this construction is usually translated with a form that feels like an adjectival / stative expression, often close to the present perfect in meaning:

• Han er ikke vant til å se ...
  ≈ He is not used to seeing ...

It describes a current state that results from past experience (or lack of it), similar to English “is used to”.

What is the difference between "er vant til å" and "pleier å"?

Both relate to habits, but they focus on different things:

• er vant til å + infinitive
  = is used to doing something, it feels familiar / normal to the person.

  • Han er vant til å stå opp tidlig.
    → He is used to getting up early (it’s normal for him).

• pleier å + infinitive
  = usually / tends to / habitually does something, talking about actual repeated behavior.

  • Han pleier å stå opp tidlig.
    → He usually gets up early (it’s his habit).

So in the sentence:

• Han er ikke vant til å se sin egen puls
  focuses on the experience feels unfamiliar, not directly on how often he actually does it.