Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre.

Om means if in this sentence.

It introduces a condition:

• Om jag sitter här = If I sit here

Swedish om can also mean whether in other contexts, but here it is clearly a conditional if.

Sitter is the present tense of sitta.

• sitta = to sit
• sitter = sit / am sitting

Because the subject is jag and the sentence is talking about a present or general situation, Swedish uses the present tense:

• jag sitter = I sit / I am sitting

Unlike English, Swedish does not usually separate I sit and I am sitting with different verb forms. The present tense often covers both ideas.

This is because of the Swedish V2 rule.

In main clauses, the finite verb usually comes in the second position. Here, the whole om-clause comes first:

• Om jag sitter här = first element
• then the finite verb in the main clause must come next: kan
• then the subject: jag

So:

• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre.

This inversion is very common in Swedish after something is placed first:

• Idag kan jag komma.
• I Sverige bor hon nu.
• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se bättre.

If the sentence started directly with the main clause, it would be:

• Jag kan se skärmen bättre om jag sitter här.

Because kan is a modal verb, and modal verbs in Swedish are followed by the bare infinitive.

So you say:

• kan se = can see
• vill gå = want to go
• måste läsa = must read

Not:

• kan att se

This works much like English:

• I can see not
• I can to see

Skärmen is the definite form of skärm.

• en skärm = a screen
• skärmen = the screen

Swedish usually puts the definite article at the end of the noun as a suffix:

• en bil → bilen
• en stol → stolen
• en skärm → skärmen

Here, the speaker means a specific screen, so skärmen is natural.

Because bra is irregular.

• bra = good / well
• bättre = better
• bäst = best

So:

• Jag ser bra. = I see well.
• Jag ser bättre här. = I see better here.

This is similar to English:

• good → better → best

not

• gooder

It means better.

In this sentence, bättre describes how well the speaker can see the screen:

• kan jag se skärmen bättre = I can see the screen better

Even though bra often means good, in expressions like this English usually uses well / better rather than good / better.

Här is an adverb meaning here, and this position is very natural in Swedish:

• jag sitter här = I am sitting here

Swedish often places short adverbs like här, där, nu after the verb in simple statements.

Compare:

• Jag bor här.
• Hon står där.
• Vi är här nu.

So jag sitter här is the normal word order.

The comma is not always strictly necessary, but it is very common and often helpful after an introductory clause like this.

So both of these are possible:

• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre.
• Om jag sitter här kan jag se skärmen bättre.

The comma makes the sentence easier to read by clearly separating the conditional clause from the main clause.

Swedish often uses the present tense in open, real, or likely conditions:

• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre.

This means something like:

• If I sit here, I can see the screen better.

It presents the condition as a real possibility.

If you wanted a more hypothetical idea in Swedish, you might use forms like:

• Om jag satt här, skulle jag kunna se skärmen bättre. = If I were sitting here, I would be able to see the screen better.

So the original sentence sounds more direct and practical, not especially hypothetical.

Yes, absolutely.

That version is also correct:

• Jag kan se skärmen bättre om jag sitter här.

The difference is mostly about emphasis and flow:

• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre.
  Emphasizes the condition first.
• Jag kan se skärmen bättre om jag sitter här.
  Starts with the result and adds the condition afterward.

Both are natural.

Because se means see, while titta på means look at.

• se focuses on visual ability or what is visible
• titta på focuses more on directing your eyes toward something

Here the point is that this seat makes the screen easier to see, so se is the best choice:

• kan jag se skärmen bättre = I can see the screen better

If you said titta på skärmen, it would sound more like look at the screen, not necessarily see it clearly.

Kan is the present tense of kunna, which usually means can or to be able to.

• kunna = to be able to
• kan = can / am able to

So:

• kan jag se = can I see / am I able to see

It expresses ability here, not permission.

You could make it into a yes/no question by putting the verb first in the main clause:

• Om jag sitter här, kan jag se skärmen bättre?

This would mean:

• If I sit here, can I see the screen better?

The word order stays the same as in the original because the main clause already has inversion after the initial om-clause. The main difference in writing is the question mark, and in speech the intonation changes.

Yes.

Swedish present tense often covers both the simple present and the present continuous:

• jag sitter = I sit / I am sitting
• hon läser = she reads / she is reading
• vi äter = we eat / we are eating

So context tells you which English translation fits best. In this sentence, I sit here or I am sitting here could both work depending on context.