Learn Hardcore Hausa: Na taɓa yin mafarki cewa ina zaune a otel kusa da teku. - I once dreamed that I was sitting in a hotel near the sea.

Na taɓa yin mafarki...
= I once had a dream... / I have (at some point) had a dream...
It suggests an experience that happened at least once in the past, not necessarily recently, and not as a habit.
Na yi mafarki...
= I had a dream... (simple past, just reporting that it happened).

So taɓa adds the nuance of “ever / once / at some point in my life”, instead of a plain one‑time event.

Why is it yin mafarki and not just mafarki or yi mafarki?

Yin is the verbal noun (gerund-like form) of yi (to do).

yi mafarki = to dream (verb phrase: do a dream)
yin mafarki = dreaming / the act of dreaming (verbal noun)

The verb taɓa takes an object, and that object is often a verbal noun:

Na taɓa yin mafarki – I once did the act of dreaming...
Na taɓa yin tafiya – I once travelled (did a journey).

So yin mafarki is grammatically smoother and more idiomatic than yi mafarki after taɓa.
You can’t normally say Na taɓa yi mafarki; native speakers will prefer Na taɓa yin mafarki.

What exactly does cewa do in this sentence? Is it like English “that”?

Yes. Cewa is a complementizer, very similar to English “that” introducing a clause:

Na taɓa yin mafarki cewa...
I once had a dream that...

The clause after cewa (ina zaune a otel kusa da teku) is the content of the dream.

Often in Hausa, cewa can be dropped in casual speech:

Na taɓa yin mafarki ina zaune a otel kusa da teku.

This is still correct and common. But including cewa is clear and fully standard.

Why is it ina zaune and not something like na zauna or ina zauna?

Zauna is the basic verb to sit / to reside / to live (somewhere).
Hausa has a very common pattern:

pronoun (imperfective) + verbal adjective / stative form

Here:

ina = I (imperfective) (1st person singular, present/progressive)
zaune = stative/adjectival form related to zauna, meaning sitting / residing / staying (in a state)

So:

ina zaune ≈ I am (in a state of) staying / living / residing.

Using na zauna would be simple past:

Na zauna a otel. = I stayed / I sat / I lived in a hotel (at some point, completed).

Using ina zaune inside the dream (that I was staying) emphasizes an ongoing state during the dream, not a completed action.

In English the dream is past, so we say “I dreamed that I was staying…”. Why does Hausa use ina zaune (present/progressive) after Na taɓa yin mafarki?

Hausa does not always shift the tense in the subordinate clause the way English does.

English backshifts:
I dreamed (past) that I was staying (past progressive).
Hausa uses aspect to describe how the situation was, relative to the time of the dream:
Na taɓa yin mafarki cewa ina zaune a otel kusa da teku.
Literally: I once-did dreaming that I-am staying in a hotel near the sea.

Here ina shows an ongoing state at the time of the dream, not present now. Context (being under mafarki) tells you this is past-in-a-dream, not current reality.

So the tense/aspect in Hausa subordinate clauses is more “absolute” or “situational” than English’s automatic backshift.

What is the nuance of ina zaune versus ina zama in this context?

Both are related to staying or living, but there is a subtle difference:

ina zama a otel
– more directly “I stay / live in a hotel” (habitual / ongoing action: I reside there).
ina zaune a otel
– literally “I am in a sitting/residing state in a hotel”; very commonly used for being based / living / staying somewhere, often with a more stative feel.

In a dream context about being based in some place, ina zaune a otel is very natural.
Ina zama a otel is understandable, but zaune tends to sound more native-like for staying / residing in a location.

Why is it a otel and not something like a wani otel for “in a hotel”?

a otel = in (a/the) hotel – the noun is left bare, and context tells you whether it is specific or not.
a wani otel = in a certain / some hotel – adds explicit indefiniteness or “some particular but unspecified” nuance.

Hausa often uses bare nouns where English would use “a” or “the”. In this sentence, a otel can naturally be understood as in a hotel without needing wani, unless you specifically want to highlight “some particular hotel (not specified which)”.

How does kusa da teku work? Is da just “with” here?

In kusa da teku, kusa da functions together as a compound preposition meaning “near / close to”:

kusa alone = nearness / closeness (a noun/adverb: “nearby”)
da = with, but in this fixed pattern it helps turn it into “near to X”.

So:

kusa da teku = near the sea
kusa da gida = near the house
kusa da kasuwa = near the market

You can think of kusa da X as one unit: near X.

Why is it a otel kusa da teku instead of a kusa da teku? Does the word order change the meaning?

There is a small nuance:

a otel kusa da teku
- Literally: in a hotel near the sea.
- The location is a hotel, and that hotel is near the sea.
- kusa da teku is an adjective-like phrase modifying otel (a near-the-sea hotel).
a kusa da teku
- Literally: in/at near the sea.
- The location is just “a place near the sea”; no hotel is explicitly mentioned.

In your sentence, a otel kusa da teku is the right choice, because the otel is the main location, with kusa da teku describing where that hotel is.

I often see ban taɓa ... ba for “I have never...”. How is that related to Na taɓa yin mafarki...?

Same verb taɓa, but with negation:

Na taɓa yin mafarki...
= I have once / I have ever dreamed... (positive experience).
Ban taɓa yin mafarki ba...
= I have never dreamed... (negative experience).

Pattern:

Na taɓa X → I have (once/ever) X‑ed.
Ban taɓa X ba → I have never X‑ed.

So knowing the positive Na taɓa yin mafarki helps you recognize and understand the negative ban taɓa yin mafarki ba, which is extremely common in Hausa.