Learn Hardcore Dutch: Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht. - When Sofie saw her grade, she was first disappointed but then relieved.

toen = "when" for one specific moment or event in the past
- Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, …
- When Sofie saw her grade (that one time), …
als = "when / whenever" for repeated events or for conditions
- Als Sofie haar cijfer ziet, is ze altijd zenuwachtig.
  - When(ever) Sofie sees her grade, she is always nervous.
- Als je hard studeert, haal je goede cijfers.
  - If/when you study hard, you get good grades.
wanneer is often more formal or used in questions; in spoken Dutch it often behaves like als:
- Wanneer kom je thuis? – When are you coming home?
- Wanneer ik moe ben, ga ik vroeg naar bed. (more formal)

So here, because it’s one concrete event in the past, toen is the natural choice. Using wanneer here would sound off in normal spoken Dutch, and als would be wrong for a single past event like this.

Why is the verb at the end in Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag? I thought Dutch was verb-second.

Dutch main clauses are verb-second, but subordinate clauses send the conjugated verb to the end.

Main clause (verb-second):
- Sofie zag haar cijfer. – Sofie saw her grade.
Subordinate clause introduced by a conjunction (like toen used as "when"):
- Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, … – When Sofie saw her grade, …
  - toen = conjunction
  - subject = Sofie
  - object = haar cijfer
  - conjugated verb = zag at the end

So here toen acts as a subordinating conjunction, which forces the verb to the end of the clause. The main clause that follows (… was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht) then uses normal verb-second order.

Why is it was ze and not ze was after the comma?

In Dutch main clauses, the finite verb must be in second position. The key is that the whole subordinate clause counts as position 1.

Full sentence:
- Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.

Structure:

First position: the entire clause Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag
Second position (so the verb comes next): was
Then the subject: ze
Rest: eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht

So:

Correct: Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze …
Incorrect: Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, ze was …

This kind of inversion (verb before subject) is very common in Dutch whenever the sentence starts with something other than the subject (a time phrase, a place phrase, or—as here—a subordinate clause).

Why is there a comma after zag? Is it required?

Yes, that comma is standard and recommended in Dutch.

You have a subordinate clause first:
- Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag,
Then a main clause:
- was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.

When a subordinate clause comes before the main clause, you normally put a comma between them.

If the order is reversed, the comma often disappears:

Ze was eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht toen ze haar cijfer zag.
(No comma is needed here, though some writers still add one for clarity.)

What exactly does cijfer mean here? Is it "number" or "grade"?

Cijfer literally means "digit / figure / number", but in a school context it usually means "grade" or "mark" (like a 7, 8.5, etc.).

haar cijfer in this sentence = her grade / the mark she got.
For general numbers, Dutch also uses getal for "number" as a concept.

So:

Ik haalde een goed cijfer voor wiskunde. – I got a good grade in math.
Wat is je cijfer? – What grade did you get?

Using nummer here (haar nummer) would be wrong; nummer is for things like phone numbers, house numbers, track numbers, etc.

Why is it haar cijfer and not haar cijfers?

Because the sentence refers to one specific grade Sofie just received, not to all of her grades in general.

haar cijfer – her (one) grade for that test/exam.
haar cijfers – her grades overall, for the whole report card or for several subjects.

Compare:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, … – When Sofie saw her (one) grade, …
Toen Sofie haar cijfers zag, schrok ze van wiskunde. – When she saw her grades, she was shocked by math.

Why is it haar? How do I know which possessive pronoun to use?

Haar is the possessive pronoun for "her" when the possessor is female (Sofie).

Basic possessive pronouns in Dutch:

mijn – my
jouw / je – your (singular, informal)
zijn – his
haar – her
ons – our (for het-words: ons huis)
onze – our (for de-words and plurals: onze auto, onze huizen)
jullie – your (plural)
hun – their

So haar cijfer = the grade that belongs to her (Sofie).

Note: haar can also mean "hair", but here it’s clearly the possessive pronoun because it comes before a noun (cijfer) and means "her".

Can I also say Toen zag Sofie haar cijfer? What's the difference with Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag?

Yes, you can, but the meaning of toen changes:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, …
- Here toen is a subordinating conjunction meaning "when":
  - When Sofie saw her grade, … (describes the time of another event)
Toen zag Sofie haar cijfer.
- Here toen is a time adverb meaning "then / at that moment" in a sequence of events:
  - Then Sofie saw her grade.

So:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.
- "When she saw her grade, she was …"
Eerst keek ze naar het scherm. Toen zag Sofie haar cijfer.
- "First she looked at the screen. Then Sofie saw her grade."

In your original sentence we need the "when" meaning, so we use Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, ….

Why is the tense zag and not heeft gezien? Could I say Toen Sofie haar cijfer heeft gezien?

Zag is the simple past of zien ("to see").

In Dutch:

zag = simple past (onvoltooid verleden tijd)
heeft gezien = present perfect (voltooid tegenwoordige tijd)

In narrative past (telling a story about the past), Dutch often uses the simple past, especially in written language:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld …
– When Sofie saw her grade, she was first disappointed …

You could hear Toen Sofie haar cijfer heeft gezien in some spoken varieties, but:

It sounds awkward/unnatural in standard Dutch as the opening of a time clause like this.
In a temporal toen-clause describing a single past event, the simple past (zag) is strongly preferred.

So:

Good / natural: Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, …
Odd: Toen Sofie haar cijfer heeft gezien, …

Are teleurgesteld and opgelucht verbs or adjectives here?

They look like past participles of verbs but they function as adjectives in this sentence.

teleurstellen – to disappoint
- past participle: teleurgesteld
opluchten – to relieve
- past participle: opgelucht

In was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht, we have:

was = verb (3rd person singular of zijn, "to be")
teleurgesteld and opgelucht = predicative adjectives describing Sofie’s emotional state.

Compare in English:

"She was disappointed" – was (verb) + disappointed (adjective from a participle)
"She was relieved"

Same idea in Dutch.

Why is it eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht? Can I put eerst and daarna somewhere else?

Eerst = first, at first
Daarna = afterwards, after that

The pattern eerst X maar daarna Y is very natural in Dutch to show a change over time with contrast:

was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht
– she was first disappointed but then relieved.

Position:

Adverbs like eerst and daarna usually come before the adjectives they modify here:
- eerst teleurgesteld
- daarna opgelucht

Other possible placements are technically possible but sound less natural or may change the emphasis:

Ze was eerst teleurgesteld, maar daarna was ze opgelucht. (repeating was ze for emphasis)
Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze teleurgesteld, eerst, maar daarna opgelucht. (unusual, marked word order)

So the original phrasing is the most idiomatic and smooth.

Why do we use maar instead of en between eerst teleurgesteld and daarna opgelucht?

Maar = "but", introducing contrast.
En = "and", just adding or listing things.

Here Sofie’s feelings change from negative to positive, so contrast is important:

was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.
– she was first disappointed but then relieved.

If you used en, it would sound like two states listed one after another, without highlighting the contrast:

… was ze eerst teleurgesteld en daarna opgelucht.
– grammatically okay, but less clearly contrastive.

Native speakers strongly prefer maar here because the emotional shift is the point of the sentence.

Why is it ze and not zij? Are they different?

Both ze and zij mean "she" (or "they" in other contexts). The difference is mainly emphasis and register.

ze – unstressed, more neutral, common in everyday speech and writing.
zij – stressed, used when you want to emphasize the subject, or in more formal style.

In this sentence:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.

Nothing needs special emphasis, so the unstressed form ze is natural.

If you say:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was zij eerst teleurgesteld.

you sound like you’re emphasizing the contrast with someone else (e.g. Sofie was disappointed, but someone else wasn’t), or speaking more formally.

Could I say Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag was ze eerst teleurgesteld without a comma?

In careful written Dutch, the comma before the main clause is strongly recommended:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.

In everyday informal writing (messages, chats), people might omit it, but that’s more sloppy style than correct punctuation.

Grammar-wise:

Subordinate clause first → comma → main clause.

So for correct, standard writing: include the comma.

What does daarna mean exactly? Is it the same as dan?

Daarna means "after that / afterwards / then (next in time)".
Dan can also mean "then", but it’s more general and has several other uses.

Here, daarna is the clearest way to show sequence in time:

eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht
– first disappointed but after that relieved.

Some differences:

Clear temporal sequence (especially after something has just been mentioned):
- Eerst werkte ik, daarna ging ik sporten. – First I worked, then I went to exercise.
Dan appears in many contexts (comparisons, conditions, etc.):
- Groter dan ik. – Bigger than I am.
- Als het regent, dan blijf ik thuis. – If it rains, then I stay home.

In your sentence, daarna is more precise and idiomatic than dan for "afterwards".

Could the sentence be rephrased with a simpler word order, like starting with Sofie?

Yes. A more straightforward word order would be:

Sofie was eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht toen ze haar cijfer zag.

Here:

The main clause comes first: Sofie was eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht
The subordinate clause follows: toen ze haar cijfer zag

Both versions are correct:

Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag, was ze eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht.
Sofie was eerst teleurgesteld maar daarna opgelucht toen ze haar cijfer zag.

The original version (with Toen Sofie haar cijfer zag at the beginning) gives a bit more narrative flow, focusing first on the moment she saw the grade, then on the emotional reaction.