Om du startar datorn nu, kan jag avsluta texten före lunch.

Om means if. It introduces a condition:

• Om du startar datorn nu = If you start the computer now

So the first part gives the condition, and the second part gives the result.

In Swedish, just like in English, the present tense is often used in real future conditions.

So:

• Om du startar datorn nu literally looks like If you start the computer now
• but it refers to something that may happen very soon, in the future

Swedish normally does not use a special future form here. Compare English:

• If you start the computer now, I can finish before lunch
• not usually If you will start the computer now...

Because datorn means the computer, while en dator means a computer.

In Swedish, the definite article is usually attached to the end of the noun:

• en dator = a computer
• datorn = the computer

So datorn is the definite form of dator.

This is because of Swedish V2 word order in main clauses.

The sentence begins with the if-clause:

• Om du startar datorn nu

After that, the main clause starts. In Swedish main clauses, the finite verb usually comes in second position, so you get:

• kan jag avsluta texten före lunch

not:

• jag kan avsluta...

So the fronted if-clause takes the first slot, and kan comes second.

Yes. That is completely natural.

This version keeps the main clause first:

• Jag kan avsluta texten före lunch om du startar datorn nu.

Then the word order is the more basic:

• jag kan

Both versions are correct. The difference is mainly in emphasis:

• Om du startar datorn nu, kan jag... emphasizes the condition
• Jag kan... om du startar datorn nu emphasizes the result first

Because avsluta comes after the modal verb kan.

After modal verbs such as:

• kan = can
• ska = will / shall / going to
• måste = must
• vill = want to

Swedish uses the infinitive form of the next verb:

• kan avsluta
• not kan avslutar

So avsluta is correct here.

After modal verbs like kan, Swedish normally uses the bare infinitive, without att.

So:

• kan avsluta = can finish
• not kan att avsluta

This is similar to English, where we say:

• can finish
• not can to finish

Here avsluta means finish, complete, or bring to an end.

It is a transitive verb, so it works well with an object:

• avsluta texten = finish the text

It is often a bit more formal or deliberate than sluta.

A useful contrast:

• sluta often means stop or quit
• avsluta often means finish something

So in this sentence, avsluta texten means finishing the piece of writing, not merely stopping.

Texten is the definite form and means the text.

• en text = a text
• texten = the text

Swedish often uses the definite form when the speaker and listener both know which thing is being talked about. So texten suggests a specific text already understood from the context.

Because före lunch is a normal time expression meaning before lunch.

In Swedish, meals and similar time expressions often appear without the definite article when you mean the general event or time of day:

• före lunch = before lunch
• efter frukost = after breakfast

If you said före lunchen, it would sound more like before the lunch, referring to a specific lunch occasion.

It can often be understood either way, depending on the context.

Here kan jag avsluta texten före lunch means that, under the condition given, it becomes possible for me to finish the text before lunch.

In natural English, that could be:

• I can finish the text before lunch
• I'll be able to finish the text before lunch

So kan expresses ability or possibility, and English may choose either wording.

Not strictly.

In modern Swedish, a comma before the main clause after a short subordinate clause is often optional:

• Om du startar datorn nu kan jag avsluta texten före lunch.
• Om du startar datorn nu, kan jag avsluta texten före lunch.

Both are acceptable. The comma can make the sentence a little easier to read, but many writers would leave it out.

You would normally use the past tense plus skulle:

• Om du startade datorn nu, skulle jag kunna avsluta texten före lunch.

This means something more like:

• If you started the computer now, I would be able to finish the text before lunch.

So the original sentence sounds like a real, practical possibility, while this version sounds more hypothetical.