Questions & Answers about Vad vi gjorde var att ta bort vaxet från honungen i bikupan.
Why is there an att before ta bort when English drops the 'to' in 'What we did was remove...'?
In this pseudo-cleft structure, Swedish strictly keeps the infinitive marker att. While English naturally drops the 'to' after 'was', leaving it out in Swedish (var ta bort) sounds grammatically incomplete. The whole phrase att ta bort vaxet acts as the noun-like complement to the verb var.
How does the structure Vad vi gjorde var... change the emphasis compared to simply saying Vi tog bort...?
This is a pseudo-cleft sentence designed for action focus. By delaying the main action and wrapping it in Vad vi gjorde var..., you build anticipation and put a heavy spotlight on the action itself. It highlights the process of removing the wax as the key event, the solution to a problem, or an explanation of an activity, rather than just stating a simple chronological fact.
Since ta bort is a particle verb, how should it be pronounced here?
Because ta bort is a particle verb, the stress falls on the particle rather than the verb itself. When speaking, you should heavily emphasize the word bort and leave ta unstressed.
Why are the nouns vaxet, honungen, and bikupan all in the definite form?