Imperator in urbe ambulat.

Because imperator is in the nominative singular, which is the case Latin normally uses for the subject of a sentence.

Here, imperator = the commander / emperor as the one doing the action.

So the structure is:

• imperator = subject
• ambulat = walks / is walking

Because after in meaning in or inside, Latin usually takes the ablative case.

The dictionary form is urbs = city, but in the ablative singular it becomes urbe.

So:

• urbs = city
• urbe = in the city / by the city / from the city, depending on context
• in urbe = in the city

In Latin, in can take two different cases:

• in + ablative = in, on (location)
• in + accusative = into, onto (motion toward)

Here we have urbe, which is ablative, so in urbe means in the city, not into the city.

If it meant into the city, you would expect in urbem.

Ambulat is the 3rd person singular present active indicative of ambulare, meaning to walk.

It can be translated in English as:

• he walks
• she walks
• it walks
• is walking

Since Latin present tense often covers both simple present and present progressive, the exact English wording depends on context.

The verb ending -t tells you the verb is third person singular.

Since imperator is a singular subject, they match:

• imperator = one commander
• ambulat = he/she/it walks

If the subject were plural, the verb would also be plural, for example ambulant = they walk.

Classical Latin does not have definite or indefinite articles like English the or a/an.

So imperator can mean:

• the commander
• a commander

And urbe can be understood as:

• in the city
• in a city

Usually the context tells you which is best in translation.

Yes. Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because the endings show how the words function.

So these can all mean essentially the same thing:

• Imperator in urbe ambulat
• In urbe imperator ambulat
• Ambulat imperator in urbe

However, different orders can slightly change emphasis. For example:

• Imperator first may emphasize the commander
• in urbe first may emphasize the location
• ambulat first may emphasize the action

It can mean either, depending on context.

Originally, imperator often meant commander or general. In later historical contexts, it could also be used for emperor.

So if you are just learning the grammar of this sentence, it is good to know that imperator has a range of meanings, even if one specific translation has already been given to you.

The dictionary forms are:

• imperator, imperatoris (masculine noun) = commander, emperor
• urbs, urbis (feminine noun) = city
• ambulo, ambulare, ambulavi, ambulatum = walk

In the sentence:

• imperator is nominative singular
• urbe is ablative singular
• ambulat comes from ambulo

Yes. Even if one meaning has been shown to you, Latin often allows more than one natural English translation.

For Imperator in urbe ambulat, possible English renderings include:

• The commander walks in the city.
• The commander is walking in the city.
• An emperor walks in the city.

The Latin grammar stays the same; the English wording may vary depending on context and style.

A common reconstructed Classical pronunciation would be roughly:

• imperator = im-peh-RAH-tor
• in urbe = in OOR-beh
• ambulat = AHM-boo-laht

A few helpful points:

• c is always hard in Classical Latin, though there is no c here
• v is often pronounced like w in Classical Latin, but again there is no v here
• the stress in imperator falls on ra
• the stress in ambulat falls on the first syllable: AM-bu-lat

Because the verb ending already tells you the person and number.

Ambulat means he/she/it walks. The -t ending shows third person singular.

Latin can therefore leave the subject unstated if it is clear from context. For example, Ambulat by itself could mean He is walking. In this sentence, imperator is included to make clear who is walking.