Translation:We will do everything so they do not pass.
"Perché" as because needs the indicative, "perché" as "so (that)" the subjunctive. Compare:
"Lavoro perché tu spendi tutti i soldi" - "I work because you spend all the money". The first part of the sentence is a consequence of the second part. It is definitely known that "you" spend the money.
"Lavoro perché tu spenda tutti i soldi" - "I work so that you (can) spend all the money". The second part of the sentence is a possible consequence of the first. "You" haven't spent the money yet and might never do so, but the possibility is there. It helps to think of perché as "per ché" - "for that" in this case.
I dreaded this section in particular. The last thing I need is conjunctions changing on me.
I learned that "perche'" can mean "why", "because" or "so that" - it all depends on context...
But the context here is no help. WE could be doing all the work because they didn't pass an exam or come by as easily as doing the work to prevent them from passing
I guess I didn't mean "context" so much as "syntax." Sorry, it's been awhile since formal English classes...
Perché in italian is like "para que" in spanish and confuses me so much! you can also say "affinché" and here is an example: Voglio fare qualcosa affinché possa rimare con te" you can also use perché here but it sometimes confused me. If you want in the beginning you can use "Affinché" to help you learn, that's what I did, but my family in italian was telling me I sounded like a poet haha.
Interesting. In your example sentence, the subject doesn't change in either clauses so couldn't you just use "per" + infinitive (per poter rimanere con te" or "per rimanere con te")? You wouldn't need the subjunctive construction since there was no subject change from the independent to dependent clause. Correct me if I'm wrong.
So that = per che. Not perché. Or am I missing something here (other than hearts)?
Maybe this will help. Note that this site says that perche' is translated "so that" when followed by the subjunctive - as it is here... Also you might note that it is etymologically formed as you suspected from the two words "per" and "che" but now one! Hope this helps.
In EN-UK there's an idiom for this - "They shall not pass!". And to convey the more exact meaning we'd be much more likely to say "We will do everything to stop them passing". Perhaps Duo should accept the latter, but would the Italian still use the subjunctive?
"Faremo" is future tense and "we are doing" is present. They are indeed not equivalent.
Why not - We will do everything so they may not pass. Isn't that the English equivalent of the subjunctive? I understand that we Americans seldom bother to use it, but is it wrong?
You've added an auxiliary verb. I expect Duo objected to that. I doubt if the subjunctive "may" ("might", etc) is seen as a priority option. It is a bit outmoded in the UK.
Thanks. I often find that that the English translations are common usage, but not correct English grammar as I was taught.
it gives you 'anything' in the hints but the right one is 'everything'. unfair
Natural english would be .. We will do everything to stop them passing ... however..!
Why don't we want them to pass, are we talking about polar bears downtown in a village, not in Italy, wolves maybe?
That's ... perché non possano passare (subjunctive of potere) because you added "can't".
How is there a difference between "do it all" and "do everything?" Come on, Duo.
First, "do everything to stop ..." is a common English phrase and "do it all" makes less sense in the given context. Second, "do it all" = lo faremo tutto - you added a pronoun.