Seems to me like in this context you would usually see "hence" or "therefore" being used in English. "Thus" means "and this is how this happened" whereas "hence" usually means "from that, this" (as in the derivation of a name) and "therefore" means "this is the reason (for the name)." "Hence" wasn't accepted here... because "Daher" doesn't mean that, but I almost wrote it without thinking.
I agree they could both be grammatically incorrect, depending on how strict you wanna be. But relating to these two sentences, how common are these kind of structures? I've seen/heard the words 'hence' and 'thus' be used that I'm familiar with them, though I think neither one is very common. Can someone with any knowledge tell me, in what areas are they used the most, where 'thus' and where 'hence'? Which one is more common in the UK, or the US? And is there any huge difference between their meaning?
I'm from Northeastern U.S. and I don't think I'd ever use "thus" in spoken language. Even in formal writing, I probably tend to avoid it.
As for "hence," I hear it often enough in spoken language (though weirdly not in formal writing). Usually only in one format: explaining the reason for something before the result.
The dog there is pretty aggressive - hence the sign. He's always so sweet to everyone he meets - hence the nickname.
This has no easy translation into English. It suggested 'So the name' as the right answer to me which is meaningless in English. I think 'Hence the name' is probably better than 'Thus the name' which isn't very good at all. Probably some sort of circumlocution like 'So the name comes from this' might be best.
One can find some good examples of "daher" being used in context on http://context.reverso.net/translation/german-english/daher
"Daher" is a compound of "Da+her" where "Da" means "that" and "her" means "hither" in a sense. So "Daher" precisely means "From that" or "From there" which one could also say as "Hence" in this context. So you could say "From there/that the name" or more naturally "The name from there/that"
I could be wrong, but I logiced through it so I hope that it is correct.
Your answer given was an incomplete sentence. You need a verb. To make the idea in your answer into a full sentence, it would have to be written "that's why the name is what it is." Otherwise, it would only be a sentence fragment.
In other words, your answer was going in the right direction, but it wasn't grammatically correct ^-^/
You're correct, but the sentence is two parts. "That's," and "why the name." Technically, "That's" is a sentence by itself (though it's an awfully strange one), and then "why the name" is a clause you're adding on--that needs a verb too.
"I have a friend who." That's a sentence that makes a fragment in the same way, just more obviously. "Who" starts a new clause that needs to be finished. Similarly, "why" in "that's why the name" starts a new clause that needs to be finished.
This is absolutely NOT wrong. This is perfectly normal colloquial English that should by all means be accepted. None of this "it needs a verb" - that argument doesn't make sense since "Thus the name" and "Hence the name" don't have verbs either. This is just a less lofty synonym.
All matters of "this sounds wrong," "this doesn't sound wrong" aside (which can never go anywhere for as long as people like to argue), the sentence actually is technically incorrect.
"Thus the name" is not wrong--just a subordinate clause. "Ann's mother loved her grandmother Annabelle, thus the name." This is grammatically correct. If you were to say "Ann's mother loved her grandmother Annabelle, that's why the name," then it would be grammatically incorrect and clunky.
The thing is, "That's why the name" is actually two parts, unlike "thus the name" and "daher der Name:" "that's" (an independent portion) and "why the name" (a dependent portion). It's a completely different construct from "daher der Name."
"Daher" actually means "from there." It is, like "thus," a subordinating conjunction. "That's why" is not a subordinating conjunction, but a full independent phrase combined with a subordinating conjunction introducing a dependent phrase to come. It's completely different, and actually has a German word for it: "darum." (Or "deshalb" or "deswegen.")
"Anns Mutter liebte ihre Großmutter, darum der Name" doesn't make sense. That would be "that's why the name."
At the end of the day, you can say it sounds perfectly normal, even though I don't hear people say that at any register of speech, but you'll never get anywhere like that. Ultimately, though, it sounds like kalkehcoisa is not a native speaker of English and was confused by the drop-down hints (which on Duolingo can be extremely misleading, especially in an odd case like this, where a subordinate clause is taken without its independent). As teachers of and ambassadors for our language, we should outline why the grammar in what he said was wrong, and help him understand how English works. So if he poses a faulty sentence and asks what's wrong with it, it's our duty to actually tell him what is, indeed, wrong with it. :)