Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet.

Because the verb is skämmas, which is a deponent verb in Swedish. That means it looks like a passive -s verb, but it has an active meaning.

So:

• jag skäms = I am ashamed
• infinitive: skämmas

This is just the normal present-tense form of that verb. It is not the same as skämmer, which comes from skämma and usually means something like to spoil, to ruin, or in some contexts to embarrass.

Compare:

• Jag skäms. = I’m ashamed.
• Det skämmer bort barnen. = That spoils the children.

So in this sentence, skäms is exactly the right form.

In this sentence, för att means because.

So:

• Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet.
• I’m ashamed because I came late to the meeting.

This can be confusing because för att can also mean in order to in other sentences.

Compare:

• Jag skäms för att jag kom sent. = I’m ashamed because I came late.
• Jag kom tidigt för att hjälpa till. = I came early in order to help.

So you have to tell from the context which meaning it has.

No, not in this sentence.

Here you need för att to mean because. If you used only att, the sentence would sound wrong or incomplete in standard Swedish.

Correct:

• Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet.

Not natural here:

• Jag skäms att jag kom sent till mötet.

So after skämmas when you want to explain the reason with a whole clause, för att is the normal choice.

Kom is the simple past of komma: came.

So:

• jag kom sent = I came / arrived late

Swedish often uses the simple past in places where English might also use simple past. If you used har kommit, it would be the present perfect:

• jag har kommit sent = I have come late

That sounds less natural in this sentence, because the speaker is referring to a finished event: being late to the meeting.

So kom is the most natural choice here.

It can be understood as either, but in natural English arrived late is often the smoother translation.

• kom = literally came
• in this context, with till mötet, it means arrived at the meeting

So:

• jag kom sent till mötet = I arrived late to the meeting

English speakers often prefer arrived late here, even though Swedish uses kom.

Because sent is the adverb form.

Here it describes how the person came to the meeting:

• kom sent = came late

In Swedish:

• sen = adjective form, as in en sen kväll = a late evening
• sent = adverb form, as in Jag kom sent = I came late

So since it modifies the verb kom, you need sent.

Till means to in this context, and mötet means the meeting.

So:

• till mötet = to the meeting

Swedish often uses komma till for arriving at a place or event:

• komma till skolan = come to / arrive at school
• komma till festen = come to / arrive at the party
• komma till mötet = come to / arrive at the meeting

So jag kom sent till mötet is a very normal way to say I arrived late to the meeting.

Because Swedish uses the definite form mötet = the meeting.

The sentence refers to a specific meeting that both speaker and listener can identify.

• ett möte = a meeting
• mötet = the meeting

So:

• Jag kom sent till mötet = I came late to the meeting

If you said till ett möte, it would mean to a meeting, which is more indefinite and less likely in this context.

Yes, it is necessary.

The part after för att is a full clause:

• jag kom sent till mötet

That clause needs its own subject, so you must say jag again.

Swedish does not drop the subject here.

So this is correct:

• Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet.

Not correct:

• Jag skäms för att kom sent till mötet.

Because this is a subordinate clause, introduced by för att.

In Swedish subordinate clauses, the word order is normally:

• conjunction + subject + verb

So:

• för att jag kom sent
  not
• för att kom jag sent

This is one of the basic word-order differences between main clauses and subordinate clauses in Swedish.

Main clause example:

• Jag kom sent.

Subordinate clause example:

• ...för att jag kom sent.

Yes, sometimes it can overlap with embarrassed, but ashamed is often the closer meaning.

Skämmas usually suggests a stronger feeling of personal shame, guilt, or regret than ordinary English embarrassed.

In this sentence:

• Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet.

the speaker feels bad about being late, so I’m ashamed that/because I came late to the meeting is a good translation.

Depending on tone and context, an English speaker might also say:

• I’m embarrassed that I arrived late to the meeting.

But skäms often carries a bit more moral weight than plain embarrassed.

Yes, in natural English that is often how you would say it.

Even though Swedish uses för att, which literally means because here, English often prefers:

• I’m ashamed that I came late to the meeting

This sounds very natural because the reason for the shame is the clause itself.

So good English translations include:

• I’m ashamed because I came late to the meeting.
• I’m ashamed that I came late to the meeting.

Both work, even though the Swedish structure uses för att.

Yes, it is completely natural.

It sounds like normal spoken or written Swedish and expresses regret in a clear way. A native speaker might also say similar things like:

• Jag skäms för att jag var sen till mötet. = I’m ashamed because I was late to the meeting.
• Jag skäms över att jag kom sent till mötet.

But Jag skäms för att jag kom sent till mötet is fully natural and grammatical.

The verb is komma = to come.

Important forms:

• infinitive: komma
• present: kommer
• past: kom
• supine: kommit

Examples:

• Jag kommer nu. = I’m coming now.
• Jag kom sent. = I came late.
• Jag har kommit. = I have come / arrived.

So in your sentence, kom is simply the past tense form.