Learn Hardcore Swedish: Hon tycker att han verkar gladare när han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips. - She thinks he seems happier when he wears his blue shirt and green tie.

tycker att
- full clause = to think that / to be of the opinion that
- Hon tycker att han verkar gladare...
  → She thinks (in her opinion) that he seems happier...
tycker om
- noun/verb = to like
- Hon tycker om hans blå skjorta. = She likes his blue shirt.
gillar
- noun/verb = also to like (a bit more informal)
- Hon gillar hans blå skjorta.

So here she is not liking something; she is having an opinion about how he seems. That is why we use tycker att, not tycker om or gillar.

Is att optional after tycker? Could you say Hon tycker han verkar gladare ...?

Spoken Swedish often drops att in informal speech:

Hon tycker (att) han verkar gladare...

In writing and in careful speech, it is better to keep att, especially for learners, because:

It clearly shows the start of the subordinate clause.
It avoids ambiguity in longer sentences.

So Hon tycker att han verkar gladare... is the standard, recommended form. Without att it is still understandable, but feels more colloquial.

What exactly does verkar mean here, and how is it different from är or ser ... ut?

verkar is the present tense of verka, meaning to seem / to appear (to be).

Han verkar gladare.
→ He seems happier (to her).

Nuances:

verkar: based on a general impression, not just sight.
- Han verkar trött. = He seems tired (maybe from how he talks, moves, etc.).
är: a direct statement of fact.
- Han är gladare. = He is happier. (The speaker presents it as true fact, not just impression.)
ser ... ut: focuses on appearance/looks.
- Han ser gladare ut. = He looks happier (visually).

In this sentence, verkar fits well because she is expressing her subjective impression rather than a hard fact.

Why is it gladare and not mer glad? How do comparatives work here?

gladare is the regular comparative form of glad:

glad → gladare → gladaste
(happy → happier → the happiest)

General rule:

Short, common adjectives usually take the -are ending:
- stor → större (big → bigger)
- lång → längre (long → longer)
- glad → gladare
Longer adjectives (or some special cases) use mer:
- intressant → mer intressant (interesting → more interesting)

You could say mer glad, and Swedes will understand you, but gladare sounds more natural and idiomatic.

Why is it när han har and not om han har or när han är?

There are two things going on:

när vs om
- när = when (for real times, either single events or repeated situations)
  - Hon tycker att han verkar gladare när han har sin blå skjorta...
    → Whenever he is wearing that outfit, he seems happier.
- om = if (for hypothetical/conditional situations)
  - Han verkar gladare om han har sovit bra. = He seems happier if he has slept well.
Here we are talking about a real, repeated situation in time, so när is correct.
har vs är
- Swedish usually uses ha (have) with clothes:
  - Han har en blå skjorta. = He has / is wearing a blue shirt.
  - När han har sin blå skjorta... = When he has / is wearing his blue shirt...
- är (to be) with clothes is much less common:
  - Han är i en blå skjorta. – grammatical but feels unusual or very specific in modern Swedish.

So när han har is the natural, everyday way to say when he is wearing.

Why is the word order när han har and not när har han here?

Because när han har sin blå skjorta... is a subordinate clause (it depends on what comes before it).

Word order rules:

In main clauses, the verb is in second position (V2):
- När har han sin blå skjorta på sig?
  (Question – main clause: När (1) har (2) han (3)...)
In subordinate clauses (after att, när, om, eftersom, etc.), the verb comes after the subject:
- Hon tycker att han verkar gladare när han har sin blå skjorta...
  - när (subordinator)
  - han (subject)
  - har (verb)

So när han har is correct as part of a larger sentence. När har han... would start an independent question.

Why do we say har for clothes? Could we also say bär or har på sig?

Swedish has several ways to express “wear”:

ha (+ clothes) – by far the most common in speech:
- Han har sin blå skjorta. = He has / is wearing his blue shirt.
ha på sig – a bit more explicit:
- Han har på sig sin blå skjorta. = He is wearing his blue shirt.
bära – more formal or literary:
- Han bär en blå skjorta. = He wears a blue shirt.

In your sentence, när han har sin blå skjorta... sounds completely natural and is what people would usually say.
You could also say:

när han har på sig sin blå skjorta och gröna slips – also fine, slightly more explicit.

Why is it sin and not hans in när han har sin blå skjorta?

Swedish distinguishes between reflexive and non‑reflexive possessives:

sin / sitt / sina = reflexive (his/her/its/own), refers back to the subject of the same clause.
hans / hennes / dess / deras = non‑reflexive, refers to someone else.

In the clause när han har sin blå skjorta, the subject is han, and the shirt belongs to that same han:

när han har sin blå skjorta
→ when he has his own blue shirt

If you said:

när han har hans blå skjorta,
it would normally mean: when he (one man) has his (another man’s) blue shirt.

So sin is used to show that the shirt and tie belong to the subject han himself.

What are the different forms of sin, and when do we use each?

The reflexive possessive has three forms:

sin – for en‑words (common gender, singular)
sitt – for ett‑words (neuter, singular)
sina – for all plurals

Examples:

han har sin skjorta
(skjorta = en‑word → sin)
han har sitt hus
(hus = ett‑word → sitt)
han har sina skor
(skor = plural → sina)

In your sentence:

skjorta is an en‑word → sin blå skjorta
slips is also an en‑word → underlyingly sin gröna slips (the second sin is just omitted after och).

Why is it sin blå skjorta och gröna slips, not sin blåa skjorta och grön slips or something else?

Several grammar points meet here:

Possessives and articles
With a possessive (min, din, sin, hans, ...) you do not use an article (en/ett) and you normally do not add a definite ending to the noun:
- en skjorta → min skjorta, sin skjorta (not min skjortan in standard Swedish)
Adjective agreement
The adjectives agree with the noun and with definiteness/plural.
- blå behaves a bit unusually:
  - en blå skjorta (indefinite)
  - den blå / blåa skjortan (definite – both forms are used)
  - With possessive: min blå (blåa) skjorta, sin blå (blåa) skjorta
  In practice, blå and blåa are both common in definite position. Your sentence uses the shorter blå.
- grön changes more clearly:
  - en grön slips (indefinite)
  - den gröna slipsen (definite)
  - With possessive: min gröna slips, sin gröna slips
  The definite/possessive form is gröna, not grön.
Coordination and ellipsis
The “full” version would naturally be:
- när han har sin blå(a) skjorta och sin gröna slips
In coordinated phrases, Swedish often drops repeated words (here the second sin), leaving:
- när han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips
The second gröna slips still belongs to him, even though sin is omitted.

So:

blå is a form that works in that definite/possessive position.
grön must become gröna there.
The second sin is simply omitted to avoid repetition.

Why isn’t there any article like en before skjorta or slips?

Because possessive pronouns and en/ett do not combine in standard Swedish:

Without possessive:
- en skjorta, en slips
With possessive:
- min skjorta, sin skjorta
- min slips, sin slips

You also do not add the definite ending -en / -et after a possessive in standard Swedish:

skjortan = the shirt
min skjorta = my shirt (not min skjortan)

So:

sin blå skjorta = his own blue shirt
gröna slips here stands for (sin) gröna slips = his own green tie (the sin is understood from context).

Could we move när han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips to the beginning of the sentence? How would the word order change?

Yes, that’s possible, and it nicely shows the V2 rule in the main clause:

Original:

Hon tycker att han verkar gladare när han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips.

Fronted time clause:

När han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips tycker hon att han verkar gladare.

What happens:

The subordinate när‑clause moves to the front.
In the main clause that follows (tycker hon...), the finite verb (tycker) must stay in second position:
- 1st position: När han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips
- 2nd position: tycker (verb)
- 3rd position: hon (subject)

You cannot say … när han har sin blå skjorta och gröna slips hon tycker att… – that would violate the V2 rule.

How is att pronounced here? I often hear something like å instead of att.

In everyday spoken Swedish, att (the conjunction meaning that) is often pronounced very weakly, and it can sound like:

å (a very short vowel)
or almost disappear entirely.

So you may hear:

Hon tycker (att) han verkar gladare...
pronounced roughly like Hon tycker å han verkar gladare... or even Hon tycker han verkar gladare...

In writing, you should include att. In casual speech, it’s normal for it to be reduced or dropped.