Learn Hardcore Portuguese (Portugal): Ontem a Maria desbloqueou um amigo, porque percebeu que a crítica dele era justa. - Yesterday Maria unblocked a friend, because she realised that his criticism was fair.

with the article (a Maria) is more typical in everyday European Portuguese.
without the article can sound a bit more formal, written, or neutral.

So Ontem a Maria desbloqueou um amigo… is perfectly normal and idiomatic in Portugal.

Why is the past tense era justa used and not foi justa?

Both era justa and foi justa are grammatically possible, but they have slightly different nuances:

era justa (imperfect) presents the criticism as a state or quality that held at that time.
- It’s like saying: “she realized that his criticism was (in general, as a fact) fair.”
- The imperfect is often used in subordinate clauses after verbs of perception/thought in the past:
  - percebeu que era
  - achou que era
foi justa (pretérito perfeito) would sound more like a completed event:
- “she realized that his criticism turned out to be / ended up being fair in that specific instance.”

In this sentence, era justa is more natural, because we’re talking about how the criticism was (its nature), not about a single event that “became fair.”

Why is the word for “because” porque and not something like por que or porquê?

Portuguese has several forms that look similar but are used differently:

porque (one word, no accent) = because (conjunction of cause)
- … desbloqueou um amigo, porque percebeu… = “because she realized…”
por que (two words) = why or “for which” in some structures (mainly Brazilian use as a question form; in Portugal you’ll also see porquê? as the usual one-word question):
- Por que fizeste isso? / Porquê? = “Why did you do that?”
porquê (with accent) = a noun meaning the reason; often appears with an article:
- o porquê de algo = “the reason for something”

Here we need the causal conjunction porque (“because”), so it’s written as one word, without an accent.

Is the comma before porque necessary? In English we usually don’t put a comma before “because”.

In Portuguese, the standard, more neutral version of this sentence would actually not use a comma:

Ontem a Maria desbloqueou um amigo porque percebeu que a crítica dele era justa.

A comma before porque is sometimes used:

to mark a stronger pause,
or when the clause is felt as more explanatory than strictly necessary.

In careful written Portuguese, many teachers and style guides would prefer the version without the comma here. So you can safely write it without the comma, and it will sound natural and correct.

Why is it um amigo and not o amigo?

The choice between um amigo and o amigo is the difference between a friend (one of her friends) and the friend (a specific friend we already know about):

um amigo = “a friend (of hers), one friend”
- It suggests we’re introducing this friend for the first time in the conversation, or it doesn’t matter which friend.
o amigo = “the friend”
- This would normally refer to a specific friend that both speaker and listener already have in mind.

So desbloqueou um amigo sounds like “she unblocked one of her friends,” without specifying which one. That fits more naturally if this is the first mention of that person.

Why is it dele after a crítica and not do amigo or seu?

All of these are possible, but they’re not identical in nuance:

a crítica dele = “his criticism” (literally “the criticism of him”)
- dele = de + ele (“of him”).
- It clearly says the criticism belongs to a male person and avoids ambiguity with Maria.
a crítica do amigo = “the friend’s criticism”
- This is also fine, and more explicit that it’s the friend, but slightly longer.
a sua crítica = “his/her/their criticism”
- In Portuguese, seu/sua is ambiguous: it can refer to Maria or to the friend.
- a sua crítica era justa might be understood as “her criticism was fair” or “his criticism was fair.”

Using dele removes that ambiguity and sounds very natural in contemporary European Portuguese.

Why does justa end in -a? Could it be justo?

In Portuguese, adjectives must agree in gender and number with the noun they describe:

a crítica is feminine singular (because crítica is a feminine noun).
Therefore the adjective must also be feminine singular: justa.

Some examples:

um comentário justo (masc. sing.)
uma crítica justa (fem. sing.)
comentários justos (masc. plural)
críticas justas (fem. plural)

So here, justa is correct because it matches crítica.

Can I move ontem? Is A Maria desbloqueou um amigo ontem also correct?

Yes, the adverb ontem (yesterday) is quite flexible in Portuguese word order. All of these are possible:

Ontem a Maria desbloqueou um amigo…
A Maria desbloqueou um amigo ontem…
A Maria, ontem, desbloqueou um amigo… (more marked / rhetorical)

Nuances:

Putting ontem at the beginning (Ontem a Maria…) slightly emphasizes the time.
Putting it at the end (…desbloqueou um amigo ontem) is very common in speech and writing and sounds totally natural.

So A Maria desbloqueou um amigo ontem porque… is perfectly correct.

Why is it percebeu que and not percebeu de que, and why is the verb after que in the indicative (not subjunctive)?

Verb + que
The verb perceber in the sense of “realize / become aware” is followed directly by que:
- perceber que… = “to realize that…”
- Ela percebeu que estava enganada.
Perceber de que is not used in this meaning.
Indicative vs. subjunctive
When perceber que expresses a fact that the subject did realize, Portuguese normally uses the indicative:
- percebeu que a crítica dele era justa
- She actually realized this, so it’s treated as something real/true.
You would use the subjunctive in cases of doubt, negation, or unreality, e.g.:
- Ela não percebeu que a crítica dele fosse justa.
  (“She didn’t realize that his criticism was fair.”)

What exactly does desbloqueou mean here? Is it like “unblock” on social media?

Yes. The verb desbloquear is commonly used in modern Portuguese for things like:

desbloquear um contacto / um número / alguém = unblock a contact / number / person
desbloquear o telemóvel = unlock the phone

In this sentence, desbloqueou um amigo strongly suggests:

unblocking a friend on a social network, messaging app, or phone;
not something like physically removing a blockage.

It’s the same metaphorical use as English to block / to unblock someone online.

Why is desbloqueou used and not a compound form like tinha desbloqueado or tem desbloqueado?

In European Portuguese, the pretérito perfeito simples (simple past) is the default way to talk about a single, completed action in the past:

(Ontem) a Maria desbloqueou um amigo.
= “Yesterday Maria unblocked a friend.”

The compound forms have different uses:

tinha desbloqueado = had unblocked (past of the past, used with context:
- Quando falou com ele, já o tinha desbloqueado.
  “When she spoke to him, she had already unblocked him.”
tem desbloqueado = has been unblocking / has repeatedly unblocked (iterative or ongoing up to now):
- Ela tem desbloqueado e voltado a bloquear vários amigos.

Since this sentence describes one completed action “yesterday,” desbloqueou is the natural choice.

Is the word amigo here automatically understood as “her friend”? There’s no dela after it.

Yes, context usually makes it clear:

desbloquear um amigo by default implies “a friend of hers,” unless otherwise specified.
If you wanted to make it explicit, you could say desbloqueou um amigo dela, but it’s normally not needed.

Saying just um amigo is shorter and very natural: the relationship (that he is her friend) is obvious from the situation.