Learn Hardcore Swedish: Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån, för hennes kollega måste vara på kontoret. - She seldom works from home, because her colleague has to be at the office.

Here, för is a coordinating conjunction meaning “because,” linking two main clauses. It’s similar to English “for” in a literary sense (“..., for ...”).

för att usually means “in order to,” so it would be wrong if you mean “because.” In colloquial speech some people use it as “because,” but standard/written Swedish prefers eftersom or därför att for “because.”
eftersom is a subordinating conjunction meaning “because” and is a perfectly good alternative: “Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån eftersom hennes kollega måste vara på kontoret.”

Do I need the comma before “för”?

It’s recommended. When för means “because” and connects two independent clauses, Swedish commonly uses a comma before it. The comma also prevents misreading för as the preposition “for.” Leaving it out isn’t usually wrong, but the comma improves clarity.

Why is the verb “jobbar” in second position?

Swedish main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb occupies the second position.

Here: Hon (1) jobbar (2) sällan hemifrån.
If you front another element, the verb stays second: Sällan (1) jobbar (2) hon hemifrån. In subordinate clauses introduced by words like eftersom, V2 does not apply.

Where should I put the adverb “sällan”? Can it go first?

In main clauses, sentence adverbs like sällan normally go after the finite verb: Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån.
You can front it for emphasis, but then you must invert subject and verb: Sällan jobbar hon hemifrån.
In subordinate clauses, the order is: subordinator + subject + sentence adverb + verb: eftersom hon sällan jobbar hemifrån.

What exactly does “hemifrån” mean? Why not “hemma” or “hem”?

hemifrån = from home (origin/source). Idiomatic with working: jobba hemifrån.
hemma = at home (location). jobba hemma is also common and usually synonymous in this context.
hem = home/homewards (direction). Not used with “jobba.” Spelling note: hemifrån is one word. The “ifrån” part is not used by itself here; it’s a fixed expression.

Why is it “hennes” and not “sin/sitt/sina”?

sin/sitt/sina refers back to the subject of the same clause. hennes refers to “her” in general (not bound to the clause’s subject) and does not change form.

In the second clause, the subject is hennes kollega, not “hon.” If you wrote sin kollega, it would refer to the colleague’s own colleague. Using hennes correctly points back to the woman mentioned earlier (across the clause boundary).

Could I say “Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån, för sin kollega måste vara på kontoret”?

No. sin would refer to the subject of its own clause, which is hennes kollega—so it would mean “the colleague’s colleague.” Use hennes.

What’s the difference between hon, henne, hennes (and hen)?

hon = she (subject)
henne = her (object)
hennes = her/hers (possessive; invariable)
hen = gender‑neutral singular pronoun; possessive hens Examples: Hon ser henne. Det är hennes bok. Hen jobbar här; det är hens dator.

Why is there no article before “kollega”? Shouldn’t it be “en kollega”?

In Swedish, possessives replace the article. You say hennes kollega (her colleague), not “hennes en kollega.”

What are the forms and gender of “kollega”?

Gender: common (en‑word)
Singular indefinite: en kollega
Singular definite: kollegan
Plural indefinite: kollegor
Plural definite: kollegorna
Genitive adds -s: kollegas, kollegornas

Why is it “måste vara” and not “måste att vara”? How do I negate it?

Modal verbs (e.g., måste, kan, vill, ska, bör, brukar, får) are followed directly by the infinitive without att: måste vara. Negation:

måste inte = doesn’t have to (lack of necessity)
To say “must not” (prohibited), use får inte: Hennes kollega får inte vara på kontoret.

Can I replace “måste” with “behöver,” “ska,” or “bör”? What’s the nuance?

måste = must, strong necessity/obligation.
behöver = needs to; necessity to achieve something.
ska = is supposed to / is going to; plan or imposed obligation.
bör = should; recommendation, weaker than “måste.”

Why “på kontoret” and not “i kontoret”? And why the definite “kontoret”?

på kontoret is the idiomatic way to say “at the office” (workplace). Swedish often uses på for institutions/workplaces: på sjukhuset, på universitetet, på jobbet. Use i when emphasizing being inside a specific room: i kontoret focuses on the physical interior.
The definite kontoret implies a specific, context‑known office (typically their workplace). på ett kontor = “at an office” (unspecified) and feels odd here. A common alternative is på jobbet (“at work”).

Is “jobbar” different from “arbetar”?

They’re synonyms. jobba is more colloquial; arbeta is more formal. Both work with hemifrån/hemma: Hon arbetar sällan hemifrån is fine.

Should I use “brukar” to show a habit? Is “Hon brukar sällan jobba hemifrån” okay?

No. sällan already expresses infrequency. brukar means “usually/tend to,” so it clashes with “sällan.”

Natural: Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån.
Or: Hon brukar jobba hemifrån. (usually) You can combine brukar with adverbs like ofta or ibland, but not naturally with sällan.

Could I rewrite it with a subordinate clause instead of “för”?

Yes:

Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån eftersom hennes kollega måste vara på kontoret.
Hon jobbar sällan hemifrån därför att hennes kollega måste vara på kontoret. In such subclauses, the order is subject + sentence adverb (if any) + verb (no V2).

Any quick pronunciation tips for tricky sounds?

för: ö like French “peur” (rounded “e”).
sällan: ä like “bed”; double ll = long consonant, so short vowel.
jobbar: j = “y” in “yes”; short o; double bb = short vowel.
kollega: stress on the second syllable: ko‑LE:‑ga (long “e”).
måste: short å
kontoret: stress on “to”: kon‑TO:‑ret (long “o”).

How would I say it in the past?

Two common ways:

Hon jobbade sällan hemifrån, för hennes kollega måste vara på kontoret. (måste can serve for past, but may be ambiguous)
Clearer: Hon jobbade sällan hemifrån, för hennes kollega var tvungen att vara på kontoret. (“was obliged to”)