Epistula in igne perit.

Because epistula is the subject of the sentence: it is the thing that perishes.

• epistula = nominative singular
• first-declension noun
• basic dictionary form: epistula, epistulae

In Latin, the subject of a finite verb is usually put in the nominative case.

Igne is ablative singular of ignis (fire).

It is ablative because the preposition in can take two different cases:

• in + ablative = in / on / at a place, or within something
• in + accusative = into / onto a place, showing motion toward it

So:

• in igne = in the fire
• if it were in ignem, that would mean into the fire

Here the idea is location or situation, not movement into the fire, so Latin uses in + ablative.

Perit is:

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

It comes from the verb pereo, perire, meaning to perish, to be destroyed, to be lost, or to die depending on context.

So perit means he/she/it perishes or is destroyed.
In this sentence, the subject is epistula, so: the letter perishes / is destroyed.

Yes. Pereo is historically a compound built from per- plus eo (to go).

So:

• eo = I go
• pereo = literally something like I go through / go to destruction

But for learning purposes, it is best to treat pereo as its own vocabulary word meaning perish, be ruined, or die.

Some forms may look a little unusual because of this connection, for example:

• pereo
• peris
• perit
• perimus
• peritis
• pereunt

Because Latin has no articles like English the and a/an.

So epistula can mean:

• a letter
• the letter

And in igne can mean:

• in a fire
• in the fire

Which one is best depends on the context. Latin leaves that unstated unless something else makes it clear.

Yes. Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because the endings show each word’s role.

So all of these could mean roughly the same thing:

• Epistula in igne perit.
• In igne epistula perit.
• Perit epistula in igne.

The difference is mostly emphasis or style, not basic meaning.

The original order is very natural:

• subject first: epistula
• then the prepositional phrase: in igne
• verb at the end: perit

That final verb position is especially common in Latin prose.

Not exactly.

Perit means perishes, is destroyed, is lost, or comes to ruin.
Because the sentence includes in igne (in the fire), the idea is that the letter is being destroyed in the fire.

But the verb itself does not specifically mean burn.

If Latin wanted to stress the burning itself, it might use a different verb, such as one related to burning rather than perishing.

So:

• in igne perit = it perishes/is destroyed in the fire
• not as specific as it burns

The dictionary form is ignis, ignis (masculine), meaning fire.

It is a third-declension noun.
Its ablative singular form is igne.

A beginner often expects the ending to look more familiar, but third-declension nouns have a wider variety of forms than first- or second-declension nouns.

A few singular forms are:

• nominative: ignis
• genitive: ignis
• dative: igni
• accusative: ignem
• ablative: igne

Since in here requires the ablative, we get in igne.

Usually, epistula means a letter in the sense of a written message or epistle.

For a letter of the alphabet, Latin more commonly uses littera.

So in this sentence, epistula means a written letter, not a single character.

In reconstructed Classical pronunciation, igne would be roughly IG-neh, though the gn cluster is not exactly like normal English gn.

A simple learner-friendly approximation is:

• ig as in fig
• ne as in neh

So: IG-neh

And the whole sentence could be approximated as:

eh-PIST-oo-lah in IG-neh PEH-rit

That said, pronunciation systems vary, especially if someone is using an ecclesiastical pronunciation instead of a reconstructed Classical one.

Usually, no—not if you want to keep the meaning the letter perishes.

Latin often leaves out pronoun subjects because the verb ending already shows the person:

• perit = he/she/it perishes

But that only gives a very vague subject: he/she/it.
If you specifically mean the letter, you normally include epistula.

So Latin can omit subject pronouns, but not important nouns whenever they are needed for clarity.

Yes, perit is present tense.

Depending on context, English might translate the Latin present in different ways:

• the letter perishes in the fire
• the letter is perishing in the fire
• the letter is destroyed in the fire

Latin present tense often covers both a simple present and something close to an English progressive, depending on context.

So even though the Latin form is just present, English may choose different wording to sound natural.