So Bada can mean Swim and Bathe but Simma can only mean Swim right? Is there a certain reason or circumstance to use Bada for Swim instead of Simma
Yes, that is right.
Bada means to be in the water, be it in a pool or the sea.
Simma is to propel oneself through the water.
All swimmers bathe, but not not all bathers swim.
I think it might be my imagination, but when I played "bada" by itself, the TTS sounded like it was saying "bäda". But when I played the whole sentence, it sounded like "bada".
Nope, that's duscha. And for taking a bath in a bathtub, it's more common to say ta ett bad rather than bada, although both are just as correct.
"bath" as a verb is transitive and means to wash somebody in a bath. But for other senses, like the one here, the verb is "bathe", which we do accept. We also accept "I wasnt to take/have a bath".
Ha! Thanks! I did not know that! I thought "to bath" could be intransitive, meaning "to have/take a bath", as opposed to "to bathe" meaning "to put oneself into water" (for recreational purpose). Could it be a BE/AE difference? (note: I'm not a native english speaker)
No, I don't think it is - but I do know that quite a lot of natives make the same mistake. It wouldn't surprise me if the word eventually changed spelling. :)
After learning the difference between simma and bada, I translated this as "I want to go swimming", which sounds to me closer to what is intended. In New England, if one wants to swim, they are wanting to practice laps in the pool or something like that. If we want to hang out at the beach, we want to go swimming. Writing it out makes it sound kind of weird. My kids never want to swim, but they always want to go swimming.
I agree, this is a bit tricky... Swedish also uses jag vill gå/åka och bada, and to some extent, this is preferable to just jag vill bada. Then again, both are certainly in use. I'll add "I want to go swimming", but I'm not overly happy with the pedagogics of it. :)