Nos ei favemus, quia libertatem sine vi servare conatur.

Because favere takes the dative case, not the accusative.

So Latin says:

• ei favemus = we favor him/her, literally we are favorable to him/her

A native English speaker often expects a direct object here, but with faveo, favere, the person receiving the favor/support is put in the dative.

Ei is the dative singular form of is, ea, id.

Here it can mean:

• to him
• to her
• to it

Which one is intended depends on the context. By itself, ei does not tell you the gender clearly in translation unless the surrounding context does.

It is singular, not plural.

Yes, it could.

Because favemus already means we favor, the subject we is built into the verb ending -mus.

So nos is added for emphasis, contrast, or clarity. It can feel like:

• We support him
• As for us, we support him

Without nos, the sentence would still be perfectly grammatical.

Favemus is:

• 1st person plural
• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood

It comes from faveo, favere = to favor, support, be well-disposed toward.

So favemus means:

• we favor
• we support
• we are favorable to

They overlap, but they are not always identical in feel.

Favere often means:

• to favor
• to support
• to be well-disposed toward
• to side with

So ei favemus can mean more than just political or practical support; it can also suggest goodwill or approval.

The important grammar point is that Latin treats it differently from English by using the dative.

Conatur is from conor, conari, conatus sum, meaning to try or to attempt.

It is:

• 3rd person singular
• present tense
• indicative mood

It looks passive because conor is a deponent verb.

Deponent verbs:

• have passive forms
• but active meanings

So:

• conatur = he tries / she tries / it tries

not is tried.

Servare is an infinitive, and it depends on conatur.

This is a very common Latin pattern:

• conatur servare = tries to preserve / tries to keep

So conatur gives the idea of trying, and servare tells you what the person is trying to do.

Because libertatem is the direct object of servare.

The structure is:

• servare libertatem = to preserve freedom

Since servare is an active infinitive, the thing being preserved goes into the accusative.

So:

• libertas = freedom, liberty
• libertatem = freedom/liberty as the direct object

Because the preposition sine takes the ablative.

So:

• sine = without
• vi = ablative of vis = force, violence

Together:

• sine vi = without force / without violence

This is a fixed grammatical pattern: sine + ablative.

Yes. Vis is somewhat irregular.

Its basic meaning is:

• force
• power
• violence

In this sentence, the form vi is the ablative singular, used after sine.

So even if the full declension of vis is unfamiliar, the important thing here is simply:

• sine vi = without force

Most naturally, it goes with servare.

So the sense is:

• he/she tries to preserve liberty without force

It tells you how the preserving is being attempted.

In other words, it describes the method or manner of the attempt.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order.

This sentence puts:

• the object first: libertatem
• then the prepositional phrase: sine vi
• then the infinitive: servare
• and finally the main verb: conatur

That is perfectly normal Latin.

A very literal unpacking would be:

• liberty without force to preserve he/she tries

But in natural English we say:

• he/she tries to preserve liberty without force

The Latin order may help emphasize libertatem a little by placing it early.

Quia means because and introduces a reason.

So:

• Nos ei favemus, quia ... = We support him/her, because ...

It is a straightforward way to explain why the speaker supports that person.

Here it introduces a normal factual explanation.

Because the sentence presents the reason as a real fact from the speaker's point of view.

So:

• quia ... conatur = because he/she is trying ...

Latin often uses the indicative after quia for an ordinary factual reason.

A learner may expect something more complicated, but here the clause is simple and direct.

Latin has no articles, so libertatem can mean either:

• freedom
• the freedom

The exact English wording depends on context and style.

So the sentence could be understood as:

• because he/she is trying to preserve freedom without force
• or because he/she is trying to preserve liberty without force

It is he/she/it, not we.

The subject of conatur is understood from the verb ending:

• conatur = he/she/it tries

So the logic of the sentence is:

• We support him/her
• because he/she is trying to preserve liberty without force

The subject switches from nos in the first clause to the person referred to by ei in the second clause.

Yes. A very literal version would be:

• We favor him/her, because he/she tries to preserve liberty without force.

A more natural English version might be:

• We support him/her because he/she is trying to preserve liberty without violence.
• We support him/her because he/she is trying to preserve freedom without force.

The exact English wording depends on how smooth or literal you want to be.