Eu acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

Pus is the 1st person singular preterite form of pôr, which means to put.

So:

• eu pus = I put
• infinitive: pôr

This is an irregular verb, so pus does not look much like pôr. That is something learners often just have to memorise.

A few useful related forms:

• eu ponho = I put / I am putting
• eu pus = I put
• eu punha = I used to put / was putting

Because pôr is irregular.

For many regular -er verbs, the preterite has predictable endings, but pôr has its own stem in the preterite:

• eu pus
• tu puseste
• ele/ela pôs
• nós pusemos
• vós pusestes
• eles/elas puseram

So ponhei is not a correct form.

Also, porei is a different tense: it is the future form, meaning I will put.

Acho que means I think (that). It is very common in Portuguese and is often used to make a statement sound less direct or less absolute.

So instead of saying something very firm like pus sal a mais na sopa, the speaker says:

• Eu acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

This suggests uncertainty or a personal judgement: I think I put too much salt in the soup.

In everyday speech, this is extremely natural.

Yes. In Portuguese, subject pronouns are often omitted because the verb form already shows who the subject is.

So both are correct:

• Eu acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.
• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

The version without Eu is often more natural in everyday Portuguese unless you want emphasis or contrast.

For example:

• Eu é que pus sal a mais, não foste tu.
  = I was the one who put too much salt, not you.

A mais means too much / extra / more than needed, depending on context.

In this sentence, sal a mais means too much salt.

A useful way to think about it:

• sal a mais = salt in excess
• dinheiro a mais = too much money / extra money
• pessoas a mais = too many people

It often comes after the noun in Portuguese, unlike English, where too much usually comes before:

• too much salt
• sal a mais

Yes. Both are correct, but they feel slightly different in structure.

You can say:

• pus sal a mais na sopa
• pus demasiado sal na sopa

Both mean essentially the same thing.

A rough difference:

• sal a mais is a very common everyday way to express too much salt
• demasiado sal is also very natural and may feel a bit more directly equivalent to English too much salt

In European Portuguese, both are perfectly acceptable.

Because Portuguese normally contracts em + a into na.

So:

• em + a = na
• em + o = no
• em + as = nas
• em + os = nos

Here:

• na sopa = in the soup

This kind of contraction is very common and usually required in standard Portuguese.

Other examples:

• no carro = in the car
• na cozinha = in the kitchen
• nas mãos = in the hands

Because sal is being used as an uncountable or mass noun, just like salt in English.

So Portuguese naturally says:

• pus sal na sopa = I put salt in the soup

You do not need o sal here.

If you said o sal, it would usually refer to a specific salt already identified in the conversation, for example:

• Pus o sal da mesa na sopa.
  = I put the table salt in the soup.

But in the original sentence, the general substance salt is meant, so sal without an article is the natural choice.

It is talking about a completed action in the past, because of pus.

So the speaker is thinking about something that has already happened: they already added the salt.

However, acho is in the present:

• acho = I think
• pus = I put

So the full idea is:

• Right now, I think that earlier I put too much salt in the soup.

This mix of present + past is very normal.

Yes, but the tone changes a little.

Possible alternatives:

• Acho que coloquei sal a mais na sopa.
• Acho que meti sal a mais na sopa.
• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

Broadly speaking:

• pus is very natural and basic
• coloquei sounds a bit more formal or neutral
• meti is common in European Portuguese in everyday speech and can sound very natural

For Portugal specifically, meti is often heard in informal spoken language, but pus is also completely standard and common.

The given word order is natural, but there is some flexibility.

Natural versions include:

• Eu acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.
• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

You could also move things around for emphasis, but not all changes sound equally natural.

For example:

• Acho que na sopa pus sal a mais.
  This is possible, but more marked or literary.

Usually, the most natural order is the original one.

In European Portuguese, pus is pronounced roughly like poos, but with a European Portuguese quality to the vowel.

A broad approximation:

• pus ≈ poosh? No — not really.
• Better: a short poos, with final s pronounced as sh only in some contexts, but here before a pause it often sounds like a soft sh-like sound in European Portuguese speech.

Very roughly, the whole sentence sounds something like:

• Eu acho que pus sal a mais na sopa
• approximately: eh-oo AH-shoo keh poos sal ah MYSH nah SOH-pah

But this is only an approximation for English speakers.

A few pronunciation notes for Portugal:

• acho: the ch is like English sh
• que often sounds like k(ə) in connected speech
• mais in European Portuguese often sounds closer to mysh
• final unstressed -a in sopa is more like a reduced uh

Yes, it is natural in Portugal.

A native speaker in Portugal could easily say:

• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

Other natural variants include:

• Acho que meti sal a mais na sopa.
• Acho que pus demasiado sal na sopa.

The original sentence is perfectly good European Portuguese. If anything, many speakers would simply drop Eu unless they wanted emphasis:

• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

That may sound slightly more conversational.

Here, yes, que is the normal connector.

• Acho que pus sal a mais na sopa.

It introduces the clause that follows: that I put too much salt in the soup.

In some short expressions, achar can appear without que, especially before nouns or adjectives, for example:

• Acho estranho. = I find it strange.
• Acho isso injusto. = I think that is unfair.

But with a full clause like this one, acho que... is the standard structure.