Aquila piscem rapit.

Because aquila is in the nominative case, which is the case normally used for the subject in Latin.

In this sentence:

• aquila = nominative singular
• piscem = accusative singular
• rapit = seizes / snatches

So aquila is the one doing the action.

Because piscem is the accusative singular form, and Latin uses the accusative case for a direct object.

Here the fish is receiving the action, so it must be in the accusative:

• nominative: piscis = fish as subject
• accusative: piscem = fish as object

So if the fish were doing the action, you would expect piscis. Since the fish is being seized, you get piscem.

Rapit is a verb. Its ending -it shows that it is:

• third person
• singular
• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood

So it means he/she/it seizes or is seizing.

Because the subject is aquila, the verb is singular too.

Latin usually does not have articles like English the, a, or an.

So:

• aquila can mean an eagle, the eagle, or just eagle
• piscem can mean a fish or the fish

The exact choice in English depends on context.

It matters less in Latin than in English, because the endings show each word’s job.

So Aquila piscem rapit means the same basic thing as:

• Piscem aquila rapit
• Rapit aquila piscem
• Piscem rapit aquila

However, different word orders can change emphasis.

The order here, subject + object + verb, is a very normal Latin pattern.

Aquila is a first-declension noun.

Its nominative singular form ends in -a, which is very common for first-declension nouns.

A learner might notice that many first-declension nouns are feminine, and aquila is indeed grammatically feminine.

Not necessarily.

In Latin, grammatical gender and biological sex are not always the same thing.

So aquila is grammatically feminine because that is how the noun behaves in Latin grammar. It does not automatically mean female eagle.

If the context does not say otherwise, you can simply understand it as eagle.

The dictionary form piscis belongs to the third declension.

That is why its accusative singular is piscem, not something like piscam.

This is a very common thing in Latin: you learn a noun’s dictionary form, but its ending changes depending on its role in the sentence.

Rapit comes from the verb rapere, meaning to seize, snatch, or carry off.

More exactly, it comes from the form often listed as:

• rapio, rapere

This is why the present singular form is rapit.

Because the verb ending already tells you the subject is third person singular.

So rapit already contains the idea of:

• he seizes
• she seizes
• it seizes

Latin often leaves out subject pronouns unless they are needed for emphasis or clarity.

In a common classical-style pronunciation, you could say it roughly as:

• AH-kwi-la
• PIS-kem
• RA-pit

A few helpful points:

• qu is pronounced together, like kw
• c in piscem is always hard, like k
• the stress in aquila falls on the first syllable: AH-kwi-la
• the stress in rapit falls on the first syllable: RA-pit

Yes.

The Latin present tense can often be translated either as a simple present or a present progressive, depending on context.

So rapit may be rendered as:

• seizes
• is seizing

Both can be correct. English just makes a distinction that Latin often does not need to make.

They tell you each word’s function:

• -a in aquila here marks a nominative singular first-declension noun
• -em in piscem marks an accusative singular third-declension noun
• -it in rapit marks a third-person singular present verb

So even before translating word by word, you can see the structure:

• subject: aquila
• object: piscem
• verb: rapit

That is one of the most important reading habits to build in Latin: watch the endings first.