Efter stationen går vi över bron mot torget.

Here efter is about location along a route, not time.

So Efter stationen means something like:

• after the station
• past the station
• once we have gone past the station

In directions, Swedish often uses efter this way. So the sentence is talking about what happens next on the route, not what happens later in time.

Stationen is the definite form of station, meaning the station.

In Swedish, the definite article is usually added as an ending:

• en station = a station
• stationen = the station

So Efter stationen literally means after the station.

This is because of the Swedish V2 rule: in a main clause, the finite verb usually comes in the second position.

The sentence begins with Efter stationen, which takes the first position. Because of that, the verb must come next:

• Efter stationen går vi över bron mot torget.

If you started with the subject instead, you would get:

• Vi går över bron mot torget efter stationen.

That version is grammatical, but the original sounds more natural if you want to emphasize the route order: After the station, we...

Usually, yes. Går is from gå, which means go/walk.

So this sentence normally suggests that we are on foot.

Compare:

• vi går = we walk / we go on foot
• vi åker = we go / travel by vehicle
• vi tar bussen = we take the bus

In real-life directions, går often strongly suggests walking.

Över means over / across, and bron means the bridge.

So:

• över bron = over the bridge / across the bridge

Again, bron is the definite form:

• en bro = a bridge
• bron = the bridge

In this sentence, it refers to a specific bridge that both speaker and listener can identify from the route.

Good question. Mot and till are similar, but not identical.

• mot torget = toward the square, in the direction of the square
• till torget = to the square, often suggesting the destination more directly

So mot torget focuses more on direction than arrival. It can imply that the square is the direction you are heading in, not necessarily that the sentence is emphasizing the endpoint itself.

Because torget means the square.

The noun torg is a neuter noun:

• ett torg = a square
• torget = the square

So mot torget means toward the square.

No. That would usually be wrong here.

• Efter stationen = after/past the station
• bakom stationen = behind the station

So if you want to describe movement along a route, efter is right. If you want to describe physical position at the back of a building, you would use bakom.

No. That word order is not correct in standard Swedish.

Because of the V2 rule, once Efter stationen comes first, the finite verb must come next:

• correct: Efter stationen går vi över bron mot torget.
• incorrect: Efter stationen vi går över bron mot torget.

So the pattern is:

• fronted element + verb + subject + rest

Yes. The sentence is structured in a very natural direction-giving way.

It moves in a route-like sequence:

1. Efter stationen — first landmark
2. går vi — action
3. över bron — how/where we go
4. mot torget — direction/goal

This is a common way to give directions in Swedish: start with a landmark or stage in the route, then describe the next movement.

A more neutral version would be:

• Vi går över bron mot torget efter stationen.

This is grammatical, but it sounds less natural if you are giving step-by-step directions. The original sentence is better if you want to say:

• After the station, we go over the bridge toward the square.

So the original word order helps organize the information in the order the listener experiences it.