Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.

Omdat means because and introduces a subordinate clause.

So in Omdat my keel seer was, the part after omdat is a dependent clause explaining the reason.

A learner often compares it with want, which can also mean because, but the grammar is different:

• Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.
• Ek moes warm tee drink, want my keel was seer.

The big difference is word order:

• after omdat, the verb goes to the end of the clause: ... seer was
• after want, the clause keeps more normal main-clause order: my keel was seer

Because omdat creates a subordinate clause, and in Afrikaans subordinate clauses usually send the conjugated verb to the end.

So:

• main clause: My keel was seer.
• subordinate clause: Omdat my keel seer was ...

This is one of the most important word-order patterns in Afrikaans.

A simple way to remember it:

• normal statement: subject + verb + rest
• after omdat: subject + rest + verb

In a subordinate clause after omdat, the finite verb goes to the end. That is why was moves behind seer.

Compare:

• Main clause: My keel was seer.
• Subordinate clause: ... omdat my keel seer was.

So was seer becomes seer was because of the clause type, not because seer itself has changed.

Here seer means sore.

So my keel seer was means my throat was sore.

In Afrikaans, seer is a very common word and can be used in a few related ways:

• My keel is seer. = My throat is sore.
• My been is seer. = My leg is sore.
• Dit maak seer. = It hurts.

So in this sentence, seer is describing the condition of my keel.

Because my is a possessive determiner meaning my, and it already specifies the noun.

So Afrikaans normally says:

• my keel = my throat
• jou hand = your hand
• sy kop = his head

You usually do not add die before the noun when a possessive like my is already there.

So my keel is the natural form, just like my throat in English.

Moes is the past form of moet, which means must / have to.

So:

• Ek moet warm tee drink. = I must / have to drink warm tea.
• Ek moes warm tee drink. = I had to drink warm tea.

Because the sentence is talking about a past situation, moes is used.

This is very common with modal verbs in Afrikaans:

• kan → kon
• wil → wou
• moet → moes

Because the sentence begins with the subordinate clause Omdat my keel seer was.

In Afrikaans main clauses, the finite verb usually comes in the second position. When a clause or phrase comes first, the verb comes next, and the subject follows it.

So:

• Normal order: Ek moes warm tee drink.
• After a fronted clause: Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.

This is often called inversion by learners.

A useful pattern:

• Ek moes ...
• Gister moes ek ...
• Omdat ..., moes ek ...

After a modal verb such as moes, Afrikaans normally uses the bare infinitive, without te.

So:

• Ek moes drink. = I had to drink.
• Sy kan sing. = She can sing.
• Ons wil gaan. = We want to go.

That is why the sentence has moes ek warm tee drink.

It is also not gedrink, because moes already carries the tense and the modal meaning. After a modal, the second verb usually stays in the plain infinitive form.

Because moes already marks the sentence as past.

Afrikaans often uses either:

• a modal in the past, like moes, or
• the perfect with het
  • past participle

But in this sentence, the meaning is specifically had to drink, so moes does the job by itself:

• Ek het warm tee gedrink. = I drank warm tea.
• Ek moes warm tee drink. = I had to drink warm tea.

These are related but not identical meanings.

Warm is an adjective meaning warm, and it describes tee.

So:

• warm tee = warm tea
• koue water = cold water
• soet koffie = sweet coffee

In Afrikaans, adjectives before nouns are very common, just as in English.

The comma separates the subordinate clause from the main clause:

• Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.

This helps show the structure clearly:

1. reason: Omdat my keel seer was
2. result/obligation: moes ek warm tee drink

In writing, this comma is standard and very helpful for learners because it marks where the sentence shifts from the because clause to the main clause.

Yes, that is possible, and it sounds natural.

It means something like: My throat was sore; therefore I had to drink warm tea.

Compare the structures:

• Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.
• My keel was seer, daarom moes ek warm tee drink.

Both are correct, but they feel slightly different:

• omdat directly introduces the reason
• daarom means therefore / that’s why and points to the consequence

Yes. A very common alternative is:

Ek moes warm tee drink omdat my keel seer was.

This means the same thing: I had to drink warm tea because my throat was sore.

The difference is mainly emphasis and sentence flow:

• Omdat my keel seer was, moes ek warm tee drink.
  This puts the reason first.

• Ek moes warm tee drink omdat my keel seer was.
  This puts the main action first.

Both are good Afrikaans.