Learn Hardcore Latin: Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt, magister in schola manet. - While the students come to the school, the teacher stays in the school.

Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt = While the pupils are coming to school
This whole chunk is a subordinate clause (it depends on the main clause).
The main clause is magister in schola manet = the teacher stays in the school.

So the structure is: While X is happening, Y happens.

Why is veniunt present tense in Latin when we say “are coming” in English?

Latin does not have a separate progressive tense (am coming, are coming) like English.

veniunt is just present tense (3rd person plural): they come / they are coming.
Context decides whether you translate it as a simple present (come) or a progressive (are coming).

In this sentence, English naturally says: “While the pupils are coming to school…”, but Latin simply uses the present veniunt.

Why is it ad scholam but in schola? Why are the endings different?

Because Latin uses different cases depending on motion vs location:

ad scholam
- ad = to / towards
- scholam is accusative (motion towards a place).
- Meaning: to the school.
in schola
- in here means in / inside (no motion, just location).
- schola is ablative (place where something is).
- Meaning: in the school / in the classroom.

So:

motion to a place → accusative (ad scholam, in scholam = into the school)
being in a place → ablative (in schola = in the school).

What is the subject of veniunt and of manet, and how can I tell?

Subject of veniunt: discipuli
- discipuli = pupils (nominative plural).
- veniunt = they come / are coming (3rd person plural).
- The plural verb form matches the plural subject.
Subject of manet: magister
- magister = teacher (nominative singular).
- manet = he/she/it stays (3rd person singular).
- The singular verb form matches the singular subject.

In Latin, the nominative form is normally the subject, and the verb ending shows singular/plural to agree with it.

What does manet mean exactly?

manet is from manēre, to remain / stay / wait.

manet = he/she/it remains / stays / waits (3rd person singular, present).
Here, in magister in schola manet, it is best translated as “the teacher stays / remains in the school.”

It emphasizes continuing to be in the same place rather than going somewhere else.

Why doesn’t Latin have a word for “the” in magister in schola manet?

Latin simply does not have articles like “the” or “a/an” at all.

magister can mean “a teacher” or “the teacher”, depending on context.
schola can mean “a school / a classroom” or “the school / the classroom.”

So we add “the” in English because English requires an article; Latin just uses the bare noun.

Why is discipuli plural but magister singular? Is that important?

Yes, it’s meaningful:

discipuli = pupils, students (plural).
magister = teacher (singular).

So the sentence is talking about many pupils and one teacher:

While the pupils are coming to school, the teacher stays in the school.

This also explains the verbs:

veniunt (plural) goes with discipuli.
manet (singular) goes with magister.

Can the word order be changed, or must it stay exactly Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt, magister in schola manet?

Latin word order is fairly flexible, because endings show who does what.

Possible variants (all still correct, with slightly different emphasis):

Dum ad scholam discipuli veniunt, magister in schola manet.
Magister in schola manet, dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt.
In schola magister manet, dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt.

However, the original order is very normal and clear for learners: dum + subject + rest of clause, then the main clause.

What gender is discipuli, and can it refer to girls as well as boys?

discipuli is masculine plural.

It can mean male pupils, or a mixed group of male and female pupils.
If you wanted to emphasize all-female pupils, you would use discipulae (feminine plural).

So discipuli here can be understood as “(the) students” in general, not only boys, unless the context says otherwise.

Why is dum followed by the present indicative veniunt and not some other tense?

In Classical Latin, when dum means “while”, it is normally followed by the present indicative, even if the main clause is in another tense.

Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt, magister in schola manet.
- Both clauses are present, so it feels natural anyway.

In other tenses you may see:

Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt, magister in schola manebat.
- While the pupils were coming to school, the teacher was staying in the school.
- veniunt is still present in Latin, but the whole action is understood as ongoing at the same time as manebat.

So: dum + present indicative = “while (something is) happening”, even when the overall time frame is past.

Could dum also mean “until” here?

No. In this sentence dum clearly means “while”:

Dum discipuli ad scholam veniunt = While the pupils are coming to school.

dum can sometimes mean “until”, especially with the subjunctive, but that’s a different usage and usually clearer from context. Here the idea is two actions happening at the same time, so “while” is the correct meaning.