Learn Hardcore Swedish: Om bussen hade varit snabbare, skulle vi ha hunnit till mötet. - If the bus had been faster, we would have made it to the meeting.

If-clause: pluskvamperfekt (pluperfect) → Om bussen hade varit …
Result clause: konditionalis perfekt (conditional perfect) → … skulle vi ha hunnit … So: “If X had been …, (then) we would have …”

Why is it hade varit and not just var?

Hade varit is the pluperfect of vara (to be), used for unreal or completed situations in the past. Om bussen var snabbare, skulle vi hinna … would describe a present/general hypothetical; for a past counterfactual you need hade varit.

Could I use vore here?

You can use vore (irrealis of “vara”) for present/unreal situations: Om bussen vore snabbare, skulle vi hinna till mötet. But for a past counterfactual (as in the original), stick to hade varit.

What does skulle vi ha hunnit mean grammatically?

It’s the conditional perfect: skulle (past of “ska”) + ha + supine. It corresponds to English “would have managed/made it.” It marks the hypothetical result in the past.

Why is the word order skulle vi ha hunnit and not vi skulle ha hunnit?

Because the sentence starts with a subordinate clause (Om …), the following main clause obeys V2 word order: the finite verb (skulle) comes before the subject (vi). If you start with the main clause, you get normal subject–verb order: Vi skulle ha hunnit till mötet, om bussen hade varit snabbare.

Can I drop om and invert instead?

Yes, a bit more formal/literary: Hade bussen varit snabbare, skulle vi ha hunnit till mötet. This is fine in writing and more elevated speech.

Is hade vi hunnit also acceptable instead of skulle vi ha hunnit?

Yes. Both are standard:

Om bussen hade varit snabbare, hade vi hunnit …
Om bussen hade varit snabbare, skulle vi ha hunnit … The version with skulle makes the “result” feel more explicitly conditional; the hade … hade … version is very common in everyday Swedish.

What is hunnit and how is it formed?

Hunnit is the supine of hinna (to have time, manage, make it). Principal parts: hinna – hann – (har/hade) hunnit.

Present: Jag hinner.
Preterite: Jag hann.
Perfect/pluperfect: Jag har/hade hunnit.

Where would I put inte (not) in this sentence?

In the main clause (negating the result): Om bussen hade varit snabbare, skulle vi inte ha hunnit till mötet. (finite verb → subject → inte → ha hunnit)
In the if-clause (negating the condition): Om bussen inte hade varit snabbare, skulle vi ha hunnit … In subordinate clauses, sentence adverbs like inte come after the subject and before the finite verb.

Do I need the comma after the if-clause?

It’s recommended when a subordinate clause comes first: Om …, skulle …. In modern Swedish, omitting it is possible in informal writing, but the comma improves readability.

Why is it till mötet and not på mötet?

till = to (destination): hinna till mötet = make it to the meeting (on time).
på = at/on (location): vara på mötet = be at the meeting. With movement/arrival, use till.

Could I use fortare instead of snabbare?

snabbare is the comparative adjective of snabb (“faster” as a property): bussen var snabb/snabbare.
fortare is an adverb (“more quickly/faster”) that modifies a verb. To use it, change the verb: Om bussen hade gått/åkt fortare, … Both are acceptable, but the grammar differs.

Is the comparative snabbare formed regularly?

Yes. For most short adjectives: positive snabb, comparative snabbare, superlative snabbast.

What’s the nuance of hinna (till) compared to “be on time”?

hinna (till X) = manage to get to X before it starts or before a deadline. It implies beating the clock.
komma i tid (till X) = explicitly “arrive on time.” You could also say: … skulle vi ha kommit i tid till mötet.

Is skulle hunnit (without ha) okay?

You’ll hear skulle (vi) hunnit in speech, but standard written Swedish prefers skulle (vi) ha hunnit. In formal contexts, keep ha.

Why are bussen and mötet definite?

Swedish marks definiteness on the noun:

en buss → bussen (common gender)
ett möte → mötet (neuter) We’re talking about a specific, known bus and a specific meeting, hence the definite forms.

Can I rephrase with other common words?

Yes:

Om bussen hade gått i tid, skulle vi ha hunnit till mötet. (if the bus had run on time)
Om bussen inte hade varit försenad, skulle vi ha kommit i tid till mötet. (if the bus hadn’t been delayed, we would have arrived on time)

Any quick pronunciation tips?

mö- in mötet is the rounded front vowel lips as for “oo” but say “eh”.
Double consonants (like ss in bussen) signal a short preceding vowel. So bus- has a short u sound.