"We are running because it is raining."
Translation:Vi springer därför att det regnar.
It's constructed differently with and without att:
Vi springer därför att det regnar 'We're running because it's raining'
Det regnar, och därför springer vi 'It's raining, and therefore we're running'.
Det är därför vi springer 'That is why we're running'.
These are different constructions and you cannot add or remove att in them.
The question I wish to ask will be better phrased in Portuguese, so I hope you know the four "porquês". Briefly,
"Por quê" means "why" as an isolated question, like: A - "He is sad." B - "Why?"
"Por que" means "why" as in a sentence, like "Why is it raining?"
"Porque" means "because", like in the previous example "We're running because it is raining."
"Porquê" is a noun and could be translated as "the reason" or "why"(meaning the same as the former), like "That is why we are running."
So, "därför att/eftersom" means "porque" and "därför" means "porquê"? And how would "por quê" and "por que" be translated?
I assume you mean as in "I think, therefore I am"? You have the wrong verb - jag tycker means "I think" as in having opinions, whereas jag tänker means "I think" as in using your brain.
The thing is that this isn't one phrase but two, separated by a comma. And hence each one needs to adhere to the v2 rule:
- jag tänker <- verb is in second position
- därför finns jag <- verb is in second position
A comma is also advised. Hence: jag tänker, därför finns jag. The phrase is traditionally translated using alltså ("hence") rather than därför.
It has two uses.
- It is an "infinitive marker", used to introduce other verbs. For instance, in "I like to eat", the word "to" has the same purpose. In this sense, it doesn't really have a meaning per se.
- It can also mean "that", when used as a conjunction. For instance, in "She thinks that they're pretty", the word "that" has the same purpose.
Looks like there is a bug in your typo recognition system. I mistyped "efterson" and had the answer accepted with a typo (which is correct), however the corrected text at the bottom was the "därför att" version of the sentence with the "därför a" underlined. It appears that the system is printing "därför att" but underlining "eftersom".
Be careful about the word order. Compare the following, all of which are correct:
1. Vi springer därför att det regnar.
2. Det regnar. Därför springer vi.
3. Eftersom det regnar, springer vi.
4. Vi springer eftersom det regnar.
In 1 the phrase "därför att" is a conjunction introducing a subordinate clause. The subordinate clause has normal word order.
In 2 the word "därför" is an adverb at the beginning of a main clause. After that adverb, the second element must be the finite verb (V2 rule). In other words, here inverted word order is used.
In 3, the complete sentence begins with a subordinate clause. The subordinate clause itself has normal word order. But that clause is the first element of the full sentence. The second element must be the finite verb (V2 rule). So in the full sentence word order is inverted.
In 4, the full sentence begins with the subject "vi" and the finite verb comes second. In the subordinate clause at the end of the full sentence, word order is normal as always.
In sum, a subordinate clause itself has normal word order. But if that clause begins a larger sentence, then that larger sentence has inverted word order.
- It has the meaning of "to", when it introduces another verb. For instance: "I like to party" = jag gillar att festa. Not all verbs actually require the att, though - and modals (like "want", "must") never do.
- It has the meaning of "that" when it's a conjunction. For instance: "I know that cats are fluffy" = jag vet att katter är fluffiga
In addition, it also occasionally features in set phrases - such as därför att meaning "because".