Learn Hardcore Swedish: Om jag hade tid, skulle jag öva mer svenska. - If I had time, I would practice more Swedish.

Swedish uses the past tense (preterite) as an irrealis mood to mark an unreal or unlikely condition. So Om jag hade tid means “If I had time (but I don’t/it’s unlikely).” With vara, Swedish also has a special irrealis form vore: Om jag vore ledig, skulle jag öva...

Can I say Om jag har tid instead of Om jag hade tid?

Yes, but it changes the nuance. Om jag har tid is a real/neutral condition (“if I have time,” maybe I will), while Om jag hade tid is counterfactual or unlikely (“if I had time, which I don’t”). Choose based on how probable you feel the condition is.

What exactly does skulle mean here? Is it “would” or “should”?

Here skulle corresponds to English “would,” forming the conditional: skulle jag öva = “I would practice.” “Should” is borde: Om jag hade tid, borde jag öva mer svenska (I should practice more Swedish).

Why is it skulle jag and not jag skulle after the comma?

Swedish main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb is in second position. When a clause or phrase is fronted (here, the subordinate Om jag hade tid), the main clause then starts with the finite verb, hence skulle jag. If the main clause came first, you’d say Jag skulle öva... om jag hade tid (no inversion there).

Is the comma after Om jag hade tid required?

It’s standard and recommended to put a comma when a subordinate clause comes first: Om jag hade tid, skulle jag... You may optionally add så after the comma for emphasis: Om jag hade tid, så skulle jag...

Can I drop om and say Hade jag tid, skulle jag...?

Yes. Hade jag tid, skulle jag... is correct and a bit more formal/literary. You can also add så: Hade jag tid, så skulle jag...

How do I say the past counterfactual version (“If I had had time, I would have practiced…”)?

Use the past perfect in the if-clause and the conditional perfect in the main clause: Om jag hade haft tid, skulle jag ha övat mer svenska. You can also hear ...hade jag övat..., but skulle ha is the clearest conditional perfect.

Is öva mer svenska idiomatic? Are there better options?

It’s understandable, but many speakers prefer:

öva svenska mer (practice Swedish more, i.e., more often/longer)
träna svenska mer (very common in everyday speech)
plugga mer svenska (study more Swedish) If you mean “practice speaking in Swedish,” you can say öva på att prata svenska. Note that öva på svenska means “practice in Swedish (as the medium),” which can be a different nuance.

Where should mer go—before or after svenska?

Both occur, with a nuance:

öva mer svenska can suggest “more Swedish (content/amount).”
öva svenska mer emphasizes doing the activity more (time/frequency). In practice, öva svenska mer is very common for “do it more often/longer.”

Why mer and not fler?

Use mer with mass or uncountable nouns and with adjectives/adverbs. svenska (the language) is a mass noun, so mer svenska is correct. fler is for countable plural items (e.g., fler böcker = more books).

Pronunciation tips for the sentence?

skulle: [SKUL-le]; the u is short (like the vowel in Swedish full), and sk is [sk], not the “sj”-sound.
öva: [ÖÖ-va]; long ö.
svenska: stress on the first syllable: [SVEN-ska].
Rhythm: Om jag HAde tid, SKULle jag Öva MER SVENska (content words carry stress). The final g in jag is often very soft or silent in casual speech.

Can I say praktisera svenska for “practice Swedish”?

No. praktisera is used for practicing a profession or doing an internship (e.g., praktisera som läkare). For language practice, use öva, träna, or plugga.

Do I need att before öva after skulle?

No. Modals like ska/skulle/kan/vill/måste take a bare infinitive: skulle öva, not skulle att öva.

Can I put the main clause first?

Yes: Jag skulle öva svenska mer om jag hade tid. Because the main clause starts with the subject, there’s no inversion there (jag skulle, not skulle jag).

What about Om jag skulle ha tid?

That’s a more tentative or open condition: “if I happen to have time / if I were to have time.” It doesn’t necessarily imply unreality; it’s often used for polite or uncertain planning: Om jag skulle ha tid, kommer jag förbi.

What is svenska here—noun or adjective?

It’s a noun meaning “the Swedish language.” The adjective is svensk: en svensk bok (a Swedish book). på svenska means “in Swedish” (the medium).

Why is there no article with tid or svenska?

Both are used as mass nouns here. ha tid (“have time”) normally takes no article, and languages as mass nouns also take no article: öva svenska, prata engelska, läsa franska.

Is skulle always necessary for this kind of conditional?

For a clear conditional meaning, yes. Om jag hade tid, övade jag mer svenska would be read as a past-habit statement (“If I had time, I practiced more Swedish”) rather than a present/future conditional. Swedish uses skulle to express “would.”