Learn Hardcore Dutch: Het is Anna die de was doet, en het is Tom die strijkt. - It is Anna who does the laundry, and it is Tom who irons.

It’s a cleft sentence used for emphasis. It highlights the subject (here: Anna and Tom) as the specific people responsible for the actions. Without clefting, you’d say: Anna doet de was, en Tom strijkt (more neutral).

Why is it die and not dat?

Because die agrees with a person (and with all common-gender “de”-words). Use dat with neuter “het”-words and with entire clauses. Compare:

Het is Anna die de was doet.
Het is het boek dat ik lees.

Could I use wie instead of die?

No. With a specific antecedent like a name (Anna, Tom), Dutch uses die, not wie. Wie is used without an explicit antecedent and means “who(ever)”: Wie dit wil, mag helpen (“Whoever wants this may help.”).

Why is the verb at the end in die de was doet?

Because die de was doet is a relative (subordinate) clause, and in Dutch subordinate clauses the finite verb goes to the end. In a main clause you’d have V2: Anna doet de was.

How is this different from just saying Anna doet de was, en Tom strijkt?

The cleft version puts strong focus on “who” is doing what. The neutral version is simpler and more common in everyday speech. You can also express focus with intonation alone: ANNA doet de was, en TOM strijkt.

Do I need to repeat het is before the second part?

No. Variants are all possible:

Het is Anna die de was doet, en het is Tom die strijkt (fully parallel).
Het is Anna die de was doet, en Tom die strijkt (elliptical but idiomatic).
Het is Anna die de was doet, en Tom strijkt (drops the second cleft).

Is Tom strijkt complete without an object?

Yes. Strijken can be used intransitively to mean “to do the ironing.” You can add an object for specificity: Tom strijkt de was / de overhemden.

Why is it de was doen and not wassen?

De was doen is the standard idiom for “to do the laundry.” Wassen is “to wash,” and you’ll hear it in contexts like kleren wassen or de auto wassen. In many regions you’ll also hear colloquial was doen (without de).

Pronunciation tips for doet, was, strijkt?

doet: like English “doot” [dut], with long “oe” = [u].
was: short “a” [wɑs], like the “u” in “cup” but shorter and more open.
strijkt: “ij” is the Dutch diphthong [ɛi], roughly “eye”; final cluster -kt is crisp: [strɛikt].

Why is there a comma before en?

It’s optional here. Many writers add a comma to separate two independent clauses or to improve readability: … doet, en …. Without the comma is also correct.

Can I say Het is Anna die doet de was?

No. In a relative clause, the verb goes to the end, so it must be die de was doet, not die doet de was.

How would this look in the past tense?

Het was Anna die de was deed, en het was Tom die streek. Principal parts: doen – deed – gedaan; strijken – streek – gestreken.

What if the focus is plural, like “Anna and Tom”?

Use plural agreement: Het zijn Anna en Tom die de was doen (or whatever verb fits). With a cleft, the verb after het agrees with the focused noun phrase.

How do I negate properly, and what changes in meaning?

Het is niet Anna die de was doet, maar Tom. (It’s not Anna; it’s Tom.)
Het is Anna die de was niet doet. (It’s Anna who doesn’t do the laundry.)
The position of niet changes which part is negated.

What is the het in Het is Anna…? Does it refer to something?

It’s a dummy (expletive) subject used by the cleft construction; it doesn’t refer to a specific thing. You can also flip it: Anna is het die de was doet (more formal/literary).

Is die here a demonstrative (“that”) or a relative pronoun?

A relative pronoun. It introduces the clause die de was doet / die strijkt and refers back to Anna and Tom. As a demonstrative, die would mean “that one,” which isn’t the case here.

Why de was and not het was or something else?

For “laundry,” was is a common-gender noun: de was. You may also see het wasgoed (“the laundry items”) in more formal or written contexts.