Learn Hardcore Swedish: Vi träffas på ett litet café nära biblioteket efter jobbet. - We are meeting at a small café near the library after work.

You cannot normally say Vi träffar without an object; it sounds incomplete. To express that two (or more) people meet each other, you use träffas (or ses, möts):

Vi träffas på ett café. = We meet at a café.
Vi ses på ett café. = We’ll see each other at a café.

So in this sentence, träffas is the natural way to say that the members of vi are meeting one another.

What tense is träffas here? Does it mean “we meet” or “we are meeting / we will meet”?

Träffas here is in the present tense, but Swedish present tense is flexible:

Vi träffas på ett litet café …
can mean:
- We meet at a small café … (habit, routine)
- We are meeting at a small café … (arranged, near future)
- We will meet at a small café … (planned future)

In Swedish, you often use the present for scheduled future events, especially when there is a clear time reference:

Vi åker imorgon. = We are going / we leave tomorrow.

So context decides whether it’s habitual or future. With efter jobbet (“after work”), it can easily be understood as a plan for later today.

Why is it på ett litet café and not i ett litet café?

Both på and i can be translated as “at” or “in”, but they’re used differently:

på is used for many public places / venues / activities:
- på ett café – at a café
- på en restaurang – at a restaurant
- på jobbet – at work
- på bio – at the cinema
i is more about being inside an enclosed space:
- i huset – in the house
- i rummet – in the room

When talking about where you meet, work, eat out, study, etc., Swedish normally uses på:

Vi träffas på ett café. – We meet at a café.

Vi träffas i ett café is not wrong in theory, but it sounds odd and very literal (as if you are emphasizing the physical inside of the building). Native speakers would essentially always say på ett café here.

Why do we need ett in ett litet café? Can’t we just say Vi träffas på litet café?

You need the indefinite article ett because you’re talking about one unspecified café: a small café.

Swedish, like English, normally uses an article with a singular countable noun:

ett café – a café
ett litet café – a small café

Leaving out ett (på litet café) sounds incorrect or very poetic/strange.
The pattern is:

ett
- adjective + noun (neuter, indefinite):
  - ett fint hus – a nice house
  - ett litet café – a small café

Why is the adjective litet and not liten or lilla in ett litet café?

This is adjective agreement with a neuter noun in the indefinite singular.

The base adjective is liten (“small”), but it changes form:

en-word, indefinite:
- en liten bil – a small car
ett-word, indefinite:
- ett litet café – a small café
definite (both genders):
- den lilla bilen – the small car
- det lilla caféet – the small café

So:

café is an ett-word (neuter): ett café.
With an attributive adjective before an ett-word, you add -t: ett litet café.
lilla is the definite form and would go with det and the definite noun:
- det lilla caféet – the small café.

In this sentence we’re talking about a café (indefinite), so ett litet café is correct.

Why is it nära biblioteket without a preposition like till? In English we say “near to the library” sometimes.

In Swedish, nära itself works like a preposition in this use, so you normally do not add another preposition:

nära biblioteket – near the library
nära stationen – near the station

Saying nära till biblioteket here would be incorrect or at least very odd in standard Swedish. There is a fixed phrase det är nära till … meaning “it is close to …”:

Det är nära till biblioteket. – It is close to the library.

But in your sentence, nära is directly followed by the place:

på ett litet café nära biblioteket – at a small café near the library.

Why is it biblioteket (the library) and not just bibliotek?

Biblioteket is the definite form of bibliotek (“library”):

ett bibliotek – a library
biblioteket – the library

Here you are talking about a specific, known library – maybe “the local library” that both speaker and listener know about. Swedish often uses the definite form this way, exactly like English uses “the”:

Jag är på biblioteket. – I am at the library.
Vi ses vid biblioteket. – We’ll meet at the library.

If you said nära ett bibliotek, it would sound like “near a library”, some random one that the listener might not know about.

Why does efter jobbet mean “after work” and not just “after the job”?

Literally, efter jobbet is “after the job”, but Swedish often uses a definite countable noun for what English treats as an uncountable activity:

jobbet (the job) = “work, my workday” in everyday speech
på jobbet – at work
efter jobbet – after work / after I finish work

Other similar patterns:

i skolan – at school
på krogen – at the pub / out drinking

So efter jobbet is the normal idiomatic way to say “after work”, meaning after you have finished for the day. Efter arbete would sound very formal and not like everyday speech.

What is the difference between jobb and arbete? Could I say efter arbetet instead of efter jobbet?

Both jobb and arbete mean “work / job”, but there is a difference in style:

jobb – everyday, informal:
- Jag går till jobbet. – I’m going to work.
- efter jobbet – after work.
arbete – more formal or abstract:
- mitt arbete – my work / my job (more formal)
- arbetslös – unemployed (from arbete)

You can say efter arbetet, but:

It sounds more formal or written.
It often refers to a specific task or project rather than the general workday.

In normal spoken language about your daily job, efter jobbet is much more natural.

Is the word order “på ett litet café nära biblioteket efter jobbet” fixed, or can I move efter jobbet earlier?

You can move the time phrase efter jobbet without breaking the grammar. For example:

Vi träffas på ett litet café nära biblioteket efter jobbet.
Vi träffas efter jobbet på ett litet café nära biblioteket.

Both are correct.

Some points about word order:

Swedish likes the rough order Time – Place when possible:
- Vi träffas efter jobbet på ett café.
But when the place phrase is long (like på ett litet café nära biblioteket), speakers sometimes put the time at the end for rhythm.

So the given order is natural, but efter jobbet can be moved earlier without changing the meaning.

Could I say vid ett litet café instead of på ett litet café? What is the difference?

Yes, you can say vid ett litet café, but the meaning changes slightly:

på ett litet café – at a café (normally inside, as customers).
vid ett litet café – by / next to a café (e.g. outside, nearby).

So:

If you mean you are meeting there to sit and have coffee, use på:
- Vi träffas på ett litet café.
If you mean you are meeting just outside the café, as a landmark:
- Vi träffas vid ett litet café. – We meet by a small café.

In your original sentence, på ett litet café is the most natural because it suggests you’re going in to sit there.

Could I use ses or möts instead of träffas? Are they synonyms?

They are close in meaning but have slightly different flavours:

träffas – meet (each other), neutral and very common:
- Vi träffas på ett café.
ses – literally “see each other”, very common in informal speech:
- Vi ses på ett café. – We’ll see each other at a café.
- Also used as a farewell: Vi ses! – See you!
möts – meet, but often with a sense of coming from different directions or in more formal contexts:
- Vi möts vid stationen. – We meet at the station.
- Delegationerna möttes i Stockholm. – The delegations met in Stockholm.

In your sentence, Vi träffas på ett litet café … is completely natural. You could also say Vi ses på ett litet café … with almost the same meaning, just a bit more colloquial. Vi möts is possible but sounds a bit more formal or “bookish” in everyday conversation.