Breakdown of Det var bussen som kom sent, inte vi.
vara
to be
vi
we
det
it
inte
not
komma
to come
som
that
sent
late
bussen
the bus
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Swedish grammar and vocabulary.
Questions & Answers about Det var bussen som kom sent, inte vi.
What does the construction Det var ... som do here?
It’s a cleft sentence that focuses or contrasts one element. Det var bussen som kom sent = “It was the bus (not something/someone else) that came late.” It highlights bussen as the point of contrast.
Is det referring to anything specific?
No. Det is a dummy/expletive pronoun used by the cleft pattern. It doesn’t refer to a concrete thing.
Could I just say Bussen kom sent, inte vi?
Yes. That works and is natural in speech. The cleft version adds a bit more emphasis and clarity to the contrast.
Why is it bussen (definite) and not buss?
Because you’re talking about a specific, known bus. If you meant an unspecified one, you’d say Det var en buss som kom sent (“It was a bus that came late”), which changes the meaning.
Why sent after kom, not sen?
After motion/arrival verbs like kom, Swedish uses the adverb form sent (“late” as an adverb). The adjective sen is used with vara: Bussen var sen (“The bus was late”).
Can I say Det var bussen som var sen instead?
Yes. …som var sen describes the state (“was late”), while …som kom sent highlights the event of arriving late. Both are correct; choose based on what you want to emphasize.
What about för sent?
För sent means “too late.” Bussen kom för sent = the bus arrived later than acceptable/allowed, not just “late.”
Why inte vi and not inte oss?
You’re contrasting who the subject was, so you use the subject form vi. Oss is an object form and would be wrong here. Similarly: Det var vi som kom sent (standard), not Det var oss som kom sent (colloquial/nonstandard).
Why does the verb come right after som in som kom?
In a relative clause, som can function as the subject. Then the verb follows it: som kom. The main-clause V2 rule does not apply inside relative clauses.
Can som be omitted here?
No. When som is the subject of the relative clause, it’s required: Det var bussen som kom sent. Omitting som is only possible when it’s an object (e.g., Mannen jag såg “The man I saw”).
Could I say Det var bussen som sent kom?
No. The natural position for sent is after the verb: kom sent. Sent kom sounds archaic or wrong in modern Swedish.
What does the comma before inte vi do?
It sets off a contrastive tag. You can write it without the comma in informal text, but the comma helps signal the correction/contrast.
Could I negate inside the som-clause instead: Det var vi som inte kom sent?
Yes, but that changes the focus: Det var vi som inte kom sent highlights “we” as the ones who did not come late. Your original sentence highlights “the bus” as the late party and then adds inte vi as a contrasting tag.
How do I turn this into a question?
Use the same cleft pattern: Var det bussen som kom sent (och inte vi)? You can also ask: Var det bussen som var sen?
Can I replace som with vilken/vilket/vilka?
Not in normal speech. Vilken-relatives are very formal and usually require commas: Det var bussen, vilken kom sent—this sounds stilted. Stick with som.
What tense is kom, and what are the other common forms?
Kom is the preterite (simple past) of komma. Principal parts: komma – kom – har kommit. For earlier-than-past reference, you might use hade kommit (pluperfect): Det var bussen som hade kommit sent.