Nocte luna et multae stellae lucent.

At night the moon and many stars shine.

Breakdown of Nocte luna et multae stellae lucent.

• et: and
• multus: many
• nox: the night
• lucere: to shine
• luna: the moon
• stella: the star

Questions & Answers about Nocte luna et multae stellae lucent.

Why does nocte mean “at night” and not just “night”?

Nocte is the ablative singular of nox, noctis (f.) meaning “night.”

Latin often uses the ablative case (without a preposition) to express time when something happens. So:

• nocte = at night / during the night
• noctibus (abl. pl.) = at nights / during the nights

So the form nocte itself already carries the idea “at night,” which is why there is no separate word for “at.”

Why is there no word like “at” or “in” before nocte?

Latin regularly omits a preposition for expressions of time. The ablative case alone can mean:

• nocte – at night
• hora tertia – at the third hour
• aestate – in summer

So nocte functions as “at night” by itself. You could say in nocte, but that would usually sound more like “in the night (within the night),” and is much less common for a simple time expression. The idiomatic way is just nocte.

What case is luna, and what is its role in the sentence?

Luna is nominative singular (from luna, lunae, f., “moon”).

The nominative case typically marks the subject of the verb. Here, luna is one of the subjects of lucent:

• luna et multae stellae = “the moon and many stars” (joint subject)
• lucent = “shine”

So luna is “the moon” as a subject doing the shining.

What case and number is stellae, and why does it end in -ae?

Stellae here is nominative plural (from stella, stellae, f., “star”).

First-declension nouns use:

• -a for nominative singular (stella – “star”)
• -ae for nominative plural (stellae – “stars”)

Since several stars are shining, we need the plural subject stellae (stars), so the ending -ae is required.

Why is it multae stellae and not multa stellae or multum stellae?

Multae is an adjective meaning “many,” and in Latin adjectives must agree with their noun in:

• gender – stellae is feminine, so multae must be feminine.
• number – stellae is plural, so multae must be plural.
• case – stellae is nominative, so multae must be nominative.

Thus: multae stellae = feminine nominative plural + feminine nominative plural = “many stars.”

• multa stellae would be neuter plural or feminine singular, which would not agree properly.
• multum stellae mixes neuter singular and feminine plural, which is wrong here.

Why is the verb lucent (plural) instead of lucet (singular)?

Lucent is third person plural, present tense, from luceo, lucere (“to shine, to be bright”).

The subject is luna et multae stellae = “the moon and many stars.” That’s a compound subject (more than one thing), so Latin uses the plural verb:

• luna lucet – the moon shines (singular subject → singular verb)
• stellae lucent – the stars shine (plural subject → plural verb)
• luna et multae stellae lucent – the moon and many stars shine (compound subject → plural verb)

So lucent matches the plural subject.

What exactly is the form of lucent, grammatically?

Lucent is:

• tense: present
• voice: active
• mood: indicative
• person: 3rd
• number: plural
• from: luceo, lucere (2nd conjugation)

So it means “they shine” / “they are shining,” referring to luna et multae stellae.

Should I translate lucent as “shine” or “are shining”?

Latin’s present tense covers both simple and progressive actions. So:

• lucent can be “they shine” or “they are shining.”

In normal English, both are fine. If you’re giving a neutral translation, “shine” is slightly more common in dictionaries, but context decides; there is no separate continuous form in Latin.

Why is there no word for “the” in luna et multae stellae?

Latin has no articles (no “the,” no “a/an”). Nouns stand alone, and context determines whether we translate with “the,” “a,” or nothing:

• luna can be “moon,” “a moon,” or “the moon.”
• multae stellae can be “many stars” or “the many stars,” depending on context.

Here, normal English idiom prefers:

• “At night the moon and many stars shine.”

But the Latin grammar itself does not specify definiteness; English adds “the” for naturalness.

Is nocte related to the English word “nocturnal”?

Yes. Nocte comes from nox, noctis (night), and English nocturnal, nocturne, equinox, etc., ultimately go back to the same Latin root.

• Latin nox → Late Latin / French forms → English nocturnal = “of the night.”

So vocabulary links like this (nox–nocte–nocturnal) can help you remember meanings.

Could we say noctu instead of nocte, and would it mean the same thing?

Yes, noctu is another classical way to say “at night”, functioning as an adverb. The difference is subtle:

• nocte – ablative of time: literally “in/at the night,” very common.
• noctu – adverb: “by night, at night,” also classical and idiomatic.

In many contexts, they are effectively interchangeable. Here, Nocte luna et multae stellae lucent and Noctu luna et multae stellae lucent would both be understood as “At night the moon and many stars shine.”