Ego penna scribere malo quam calamo, quia manus mea sic facilius movetur.

Yes. In Latin, the ending of malo already tells you the subject is I, so ego is not necessary for basic grammar.

When Latin includes ego, it is usually for emphasis, contrast, or clarity. Here it can feel like:

I prefer to write with a quill rather than a reed pen...

So ego adds stress, not new information.

Malo means I prefer.

It is an irregular verb, from malle, and it is historically connected with magis volo (I want more / I want rather). In practice, you should simply learn it as its own verb:

• malo = I prefer
• mavis = you prefer
• mavult = he/she prefers

So in this sentence, scribere malo means I prefer to write.

Because after malo, Latin often uses an infinitive to say what someone prefers to do.

So:

• scribere malo = I prefer to write
• literally, something like I prefer to write

This is very similar to English, where prefer can also be followed by an infinitive:

• I prefer to write

They are ablatives of means or instrument. Latin often uses the ablative without a preposition to mean with, by means of, or using.

So:

• penna = with a quill/feather pen
• calamo = with a reed pen

This is why the sentence does not need cum here. Latin very naturally says:

• gladio pugnat = he fights with a sword
• penna scribit = he writes with a quill

Latin often leaves out repeated words when they are easily understood.

So:

• penna scribere malo quam calamo

means:

• I prefer to write with a quill rather than with a reed pen

The second scribere is understood:

• penna scribere malo quam calamo (scribere)

English does the same kind of thing:

• I prefer tea to coffee instead of
• I prefer tea rather than I prefer coffee

Yes. Here quam introduces the second part of the comparison:

• penna ... quam calamo = with a quill ... than with a reed pen

Because malo already contains the idea of preference, quam works naturally to mark what is being compared.

Also notice that both things being compared are in the same case:

• penna — ablative
• calamo — ablative

That parallel structure is very common in Latin comparisons.

In this sentence, they refer to two different writing instruments.

• penna literally means feather and can refer to a quill pen
• calamus literally means reed and can refer to a reed pen

So the speaker is comparing two tools for writing:

• a quill
• a reed pen

A learner might expect both words to mean just pen, but Latin is being more specific about the material or form of the instrument.

Sic means thus, in this way, or like this.

Here it refers back to the preferred method of writing, so the sense is:

• because my hand moves more easily this way
• that is, when I write with a quill

So sic connects the reason to the previous preference.

Because facilius is an adverb, while facilior is an adjective.

Here the word is modifying movetur (moves / is moved), so Latin needs an adverb:

• facilius movetur = moves more easily

Compare:

• facilior manus = an easier hand or a more manageable hand — adjective
• manus facilius movetur = the hand moves more easily — adverb

English also uses an adverb here: more easily, not more easy.

Grammatically, yes, movetur is passive in form: is moved.

But with some Latin verbs, especially ones involving motion, feeling, or change, the passive form can sound quite natural where English would simply use an active-style expression. So here:

• manus mea sic facilius movetur

is best understood as:

• my hand moves more easily this way

not necessarily as a strong literal passive like is moved by someone else.

So this is one of those places where Latin and English express the idea a little differently.

Yes.

• manus = hand
• mea = my
• movetur = moves / is moved

So manus mea is the subject: my hand.

A useful thing to notice is that manus is a fourth-declension noun, and its nominative singular is manus. That form may look unfamiliar if you are expecting a first- or second-declension ending.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order, because the endings show how the words function.

This sentence places important words in prominent spots:

• Ego first for emphasis
• penna early, because it is the preferred instrument
• malo near the middle, where the main idea of preference becomes clear
• quia introduces the reason
• facilius comes right before movetur, highlighting more easily

A more English-like order would be something like:

• Ego malo scribere penna quam calamo, quia manus mea sic facilius movetur.

But the original order is perfectly natural Latin.

It could, but that would usually be less natural here.

When Latin expresses the instrument used to do something, it often prefers the bare ablative without cum:

• penna scribere = to write with a quill
• gladio pugnare = to fight with a sword

Using cum is more common when the sense is together with someone/something, or in certain other contexts. For a straightforward tool or means, the simple ablative is the normal choice.