כשהילדים באו, אנחנו כבר היינו יושבים ליד המדורה ושותים תה.

It is כש־ + הילדים.

• כש־ means when.
• הילדים means the children.

So כשהילדים literally means when the children...

This כש־ is a very common prefix in Hebrew. You will also see:

• כשבאתי = when I came
• כשאנחנו אוכלים = when we eat / when we are eating

It is basically a shortened form of כאשר, which also means when, but כש־ is much more common in everyday Hebrew.

Because הילדים means the children, while ילדים means just children.

The prefix ה־ is the Hebrew definite article, equivalent to English the.

• ילדים = children
• הילדים = the children

In this sentence, we are talking about specific children already known in the context, so הילדים is natural.

באו is the past tense, 3rd person plural form of לבוא (to come).

So:

• הוא בא = he came
• היא באה = she came
• הם/הן באו = they came

Since the subject is הילדים (the children), which is plural, the verb is plural too: באו.

A native English speaker may notice that Hebrew past tense verbs already show who did the action, so in many cases the subject could even be omitted if it is clear from context. Here, though, הילדים is stated explicitly.

This is one of the most important things to notice in the sentence.

• ישבנו = we sat / we were sitting
• היינו יושבים = we were sitting / we used to sit / we were in the state of sitting

In this sentence, היינו יושבים gives a more continuous or ongoing background feeling. It describes what was already happening when the children arrived.

So the contrast is:

• כשהילדים באו = the children arrived
• אנחנו כבר היינו יושבים... = we were already sitting...

This is similar to the English past progressive were sitting.

In Modern Hebrew, the simple past often does a lot of work, and many speakers might also say something like:

• כשהילדים באו, כבר ישבנו ליד המדורה ושתינו תה.

That is also natural. But היינו יושבים ושותים makes the ongoing scene especially clear.

Yes, but with an important nuance.

The structure:

• היה / הייתה / היינו / היו
  • participle

can express an ongoing past situation, something like English was/were doing.

So:

• היינו יושבים = we were sitting
• היינו שותים = we were drinking

This construction exists in Modern Hebrew, but Hebrew often uses the simple past where English would prefer the progressive. So both of these can work, depending on style and nuance:

• ישבנו ושתינו
• היינו יושבים ושותים

The version with היינו + participle sounds more descriptive and scene-setting here.

Because they agree with the subject אנחנו (we).

In Hebrew, participles agree in gender and number.

Here the forms are:

• יושבים = masculine plural
• שותים = masculine plural

That means the speaker is either:

1. talking about an all-male group, or
2. talking about a mixed group, where Hebrew normally uses the masculine plural.

If the group were all female, you would expect:

• כשהילדים באו, אנחנו כבר היינו יושבות ליד המדורה ושותות תה.

So this is an agreement issue, not a tense issue.

Because Hebrew, like English, often uses one auxiliary for two parallel actions.

So:

• היינו יושבים ליד המדורה ושותים תה

means:

• we were sitting by the fire and drinking tea

The single היינו applies to both יושבים and שותים.

You could repeat it:

• היינו יושבים ליד המדורה והיינו שותים תה

but that is less smooth here and usually unnecessary unless you want extra emphasis.

כבר means already.

It shows that by the time the children came, the action was already in progress.

So the timeline is:

1. We sat down by the fire and started drinking tea.
2. After that, the children came.

That is why כבר fits so well with היינו יושבים ושותים.

Its position is also natural:

• אנחנו כבר היינו יושבים...

Hebrew is fairly flexible with adverbs like כבר, and you might also hear slightly different word orders in speech, but this placement is very normal.

ליד means next to / beside / by.

So:

• ליד המדורה = by the campfire / beside the bonfire

And:

• המדורה = the bonfire / the campfire

Again, ה־ is the definite article, so it is the fire, not just a fire.

A learner may also notice that English often says by the campfire, while Hebrew literally says next to the campfire. That is a very natural Hebrew way to express location.

Because the sentence refers to a specific fire, understood in the situation.

• מדורה = a bonfire / a campfire
• המדורה = the bonfire / the campfire

Hebrew often uses the definite article when the thing is identifiable in the scene. If everyone knows which fire is being talked about, המדורה is the natural choice.

If you said ליד מדורה, it would sound more like next to a campfire, which is possible in some contexts, but less natural for a concrete scene like this one.

Because את is used before a definite direct object, and תה here is indefinite.

• שותים תה = drinking tea
• שותים את התה = drinking the tea

So in this sentence:

• תה = tea in general, not a specific already-identified tea

That is why there is no את.

Yes. A very natural alternative would be:

• כשהילדים באו, כבר ישבנו ליד המדורה ושתינו תה.

That version is probably even more common in everyday Hebrew.

The difference is mostly one of aspect and style:

• ישבנו ושתינו = straightforward past narration
• היינו יושבים ושותים = more explicitly ongoing, more scene-setting

So the sentence you were given is not wrong or strange; it just highlights the continuing action more clearly.

Yes, it is helpful and standard.

The first part:

• כשהילדים באו

is a subordinate time clause: when the children came.

The second part is the main clause:

• אנחנו כבר היינו יושבים ליד המדורה ושותים תה

The comma makes the structure easier to read. In normal writing, it is the expected punctuation here.

Sometimes yes, because היינו already tells you the subject is we.

So Hebrew could also say:

• כשהילדים באו, כבר היינו יושבים ליד המדורה ושותים תה.

That is perfectly grammatical.

Including אנחנו adds clarity or a bit of emphasis:

• we were already sitting...

Hebrew often includes subject pronouns for emphasis, contrast, or style, even when the verb already shows the person.

It is a very common Hebrew pattern:

כש־ + past event, then background action in the past.

Here:

• כשהילדים באו = the interrupting or time-setting event
• אנחנו כבר היינו יושבים... ושותים... = the background activity already happening

This is similar to English patterns like:

• When X happened, we were already doing Y.

So this sentence is useful not only for vocabulary, but also for learning how Hebrew describes one past action happening against the background of another.