Magister formam agrorum legit quasi totum agrum videat.

It has:

• a main clause: Magister formam agrorum legit
• a subordinate clause of comparison/appearance: quasi totum agrum videat

So the sentence is built like this:

• Magister = subject
• legit = main verb
• formam agrorum = object of legit
• quasi totum agrum videat = as if clause explaining the manner or apparent point of view

Here is the parsing:

• magister — nominative singular
  
  • the subject
• formam — accusative singular
  
  • the direct object of legit
• agrorum — genitive plural
  
  • depends on formam: the form of the fields
• agrum — accusative singular
  
  • the direct object of videat

So the cases tell you the relationships:

• nominative = who does the action
• accusative = what receives the action
• genitive = possession/association, often of ...

Because it depends on formam.

Latin often uses the genitive where English uses of. So:

• forma agrorum = the form/shape/plan of the fields

A learner may want to translate word-for-word as if agrorum were another object, but it is not. It is not something being read directly. It describes whose or of what the forma is.

Legit is:

• 3rd person singular
• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood
• from legere

The form legit can mean different things depending on context, because legere has a range of meanings, such as:

• read
• gather
• choose/select

So grammatically, legit simply means he/she reads or he/she chooses/selects, depending on context. The form itself is straightforward present indicative.

Because it comes after quasi, which here means as if or as though.

In Latin, clauses introduced by quasi often use the subjunctive when the speaker is presenting something as:

• an appearance
• a comparison
• something imagined
• something not being directly asserted as a fact

So quasi ... videat means something like as if he sees / as though he were seeing, not a plain factual statement he sees.

That is why Latin uses videat rather than videt here.

Here quasi means as if or as though.

It introduces a comparison, but not a simple, literal comparison. It suggests that the action in the subordinate clause is how things seem, or how the main action is being presented.

So the idea is not necessarily that the teacher really does see the whole field, but that he acts as if he does.

Because the main verb is legit, a present tense verb, and the subordinate action is being presented as contemporaneous with it.

So Latin naturally uses the present subjunctive:

• legit = he reads / he chooses
• videat = as if he sees / were seeing

If you saw videret, that would normally sound more past-oriented or belong in a different tense framework.

A simple way to remember it:

• present main verb → often present subjunctive in a dependent clause referring to the same time

Because agrum is the direct object of videat, so it must be in the accusative.

Also, the adjective totum must agree with agrum in:

• gender: masculine
• number: singular
• case: accusative

So:

• nominative: totus ager = the whole field as subject
• accusative: totum agrum = the whole field as object

Since the sentence says someone sees the field, Latin needs the object form: totum agrum.

Because they belong to two different parts of the sentence and do two different jobs.

• agrorum goes with formam
  
  • formam agrorum = the form of the fields
• agrum goes with videat
  
  • totum agrum videat = he sees the whole field

So there is no grammatical problem here. Latin is not saying the same thing twice with mismatched numbers. One noun phrase is plural, the other singular, because they are part of different ideas.

Yes, most naturally it is.

Latin often leaves pronouns unstated when the subject is clear from context. So after Magister ... legit, the clause quasi totum agrum videat is normally understood as:

• as if he sees the whole field

That he is most naturally the same person as magister.

Latin does not need to repeat a separate word for he unless there is a reason to emphasize or clarify it.

Because Latin relies much more on case endings than on word order.

English usually depends heavily on position:

• subject + verb + object

Latin can move words around more freely because endings show their function. In this sentence:

• magister is clearly the subject because it is nominative
• formam and agrum are clearly objects because they are accusative
• agrorum is clearly genitive

So Latin can say:

• Magister formam agrorum legit rather than forcing the exact English order

Also, Latin often places the verb toward the end of its clause, especially in more formal or literary style. The subordinate clause does this too:

• quasi totum agrum videat

So the word order is not random; it is flexible, and the endings carry the grammar.