Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

Because this is a direct wh-question in Danish.

Danish main clauses normally follow the V2 rule: the finite verb comes in the second position. In a question like this, hvad is placed first, so the verb kalder comes next, and the subject banken follows after that.

So the pattern is:

Hvad + kalder + banken + indsigelsen?

Compare:

• Statement: Banken kalder indsigelsen ...
• Direct question: Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

If you said hvad banken kalder indsigelsen, that would usually be part of a subordinate clause, not a direct question.

Because Danish does not use do-support the way English does.

In English, you say:

• What does the bank call the objection?

In Danish, the present tense is already built into kalder, so there is no extra helper verb. Danish simply changes the word order:

• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

So kalder by itself already covers the idea of does call.

Here kalder means calls, names, or refers to as.

This is the common Danish pattern:

kalde + someone/something + a name/label

For example:

• De kalder ham Peter = They call him Peter
• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen? = What does the bank call the objection/dispute?

So this is not about making a phone call. It is about what label or term the bank uses.

Hvad is the question word, and here it asks for the name, term, or label that the bank gives to indsigelsen.

A useful way to think about it is to imagine an unfinished statement:

• Banken kalder indsigelsen X

Then the question asks what X is:

• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

So hvad is not the thing being called. It is the missing label.

In Danish, the definite article is usually added as a suffix to the noun instead of being a separate word like English the.

So:

• bank = bank
• banken = the bank

And:

• indsigelse = objection / dispute
• indsigelsen = the objection / the dispute

That is why you do not see a separate word for the here.

Also notice:

• bank + en → banken
• indsigelse + n → indsigelsen

With nouns ending in -e, the definite ending is often just -n.

Because indsigelsen is the thing being named, while hvad is asking for the name itself.

The structure is basically:

• The bank calls the objection/dispute X
• What does the bank call the objection/dispute?

So indsigelsen stays in the sentence as the object, and hvad moves to the front as the question word.

This is very similar to English word order in:

• What does the bank call the objection?

Not without changing the meaning.

In this sentence:

• banken is the subject
• indsigelsen is the object

If you said:

• Hvad kalder indsigelsen banken?

that would mean something like:

• What does the objection call the bank?

That is a completely different structure.

In Danish, word order is very important for showing who is doing the action and who receives it.

Not exactly.

It asks what term or label the bank uses for the objection/dispute. That is slightly different from asking what the thing means.

So this sentence is about naming or classification, not necessarily a full explanation.

Compare the difference:

• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen? = What does the bank call it?
• Hvad er en indsigelse? = What is an objection/dispute?
• Hvad betyder indsigelse? = What does indsigelse mean?

Yes, but it would sound more formal or less direct.

A passive version could be:

• Hvad kaldes indsigelsen af banken?

That is grammatical, but in everyday Danish, the active version is usually more natural:

• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

So a learner should understand the passive, but the active sentence is a very normal way to ask the question.

That would change the sentence from referring to a specific objection/dispute to a general one.

• indsigelsen = the specific objection/dispute already known in the conversation
• en indsigelse = an objection/dispute in general

So:

• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen? asks about one particular case
• Hvad kalder banken en indsigelse? would sound more like asking what term the bank uses for that kind of thing in general

The same idea applies to banken:

• banken = the bank, a specific bank already understood from context

Very often, yes, when it means to call/name something.

The pattern is:

kalde + object + name/description

Examples:

• Jeg kalder ham min ven = I call him my friend
• De kalder det en fejl = They call it a mistake
• Hvad kalder banken indsigelsen?

So if you want to say that someone gives something a name, this is a very useful pattern to learn.