Log inSign up

Servus ianuam aperit, et dominus hospitem salutat.

Servus ianuam aperit, et dominus hospitem salutat.
The servant opens the door, and the master greets the guest.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Latin grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Latin now

Questions & Answers about Servus ianuam aperit, et dominus hospitem salutat.

How does each Latin word in the sentence correspond to the English meaning?

Word by word:

  • servus – slave / servant (subject)
  • ianuam – door (direct object; literally “the door”)
  • aperit – opens (verb, “he/she/it opens”)
  • et – and
  • dominus – master / lord (subject)
  • hospitem – guest (direct object; literally “the guest”)
  • salutat – greets (verb, “he/she/it greets”)

So: Servus ianuam aperit, et dominus hospitem salutat.
= “The slave opens the door, and the master greets the guest.”

Why is there no word for “the” in the Latin sentence?

Latin has no definite or indefinite articles (no words for “the” or “a/an”).

  • servus can mean “a slave” or “the slave”.
  • ianuam can mean “a door” or “the door”, depending on context.

The context decides whether we translate with “a” or “the” in English.

Why do ianuam and hospitem end in -am and -em, instead of the dictionary forms ianua and hospes?

Those endings show case, which tells you what job the noun does in the sentence.

  • Dictionary forms:
    • ianua – “door” (nominative singular, basic form)
    • hospes – “guest/host” (nominative singular, basic form)

In the sentence:

  • ianuam (with -am) is accusative singular, used for the direct object → “(the) door” that is being opened.
  • hospitem (with -em) is accusative singular, again the direct object → “(the) guest” who is being greeted.

So -am and -em mark that these nouns receive the action of the verb.

How can I tell who is doing the action and who is receiving it?

Latin uses endings, not word order, to show this.

  1. Subjects (doers) are usually in the nominative case:

    • servus – nominative singular → the one who opens.
    • dominus – nominative singular → the one who greets.

  2. Direct objects (receivers) are in the accusative case:

    • ianuam – accusative → the thing being opened.
    • hospitem – accusative → the person being greeted.

So you know:

  • servus opens (subject) ianuam (object).
  • dominus greets (subject) hospitem (object).

Even if you changed the order, the endings would still show who does what.

Why is the word order Servus ianuam aperit instead of “Servus aperit ianuam” like English S–V–O?

Latin word order is flexible, because roles are marked by endings, not by position.

  • Servus ianuam aperit
  • Servus aperit ianuam
  • Ianum servus aperit

All could mean: “The slave opens the door.”
The typical “neutral” order in Latin is often Subject – Object – Verb (SOV), so Servus ianuam aperit is perfectly normal.

However, other orders are used for emphasis or style, not to change the basic meaning.

What tense and person are aperit and salutat, and how do we know?

Both verbs are in the present tense, third person singular, active.

  • aperit:

    • stem: aper- (from aperire – “to open”)
    • ending: -it → he/she/it opens

  • salutat:

    • stem: salut- (from salutare – “to greet”)
    • ending: -at → he/she/it greets

In Latin, the personal ending (-t) tells you “he/she/it,” so you don’t need a separate pronoun (he) unless you want emphasis.

Why is there a comma before et in the Latin sentence? Is that normal?

In Classical Latin manuscripts, punctuation was minimal or absent. Modern edited texts often use punctuation similar to modern European languages.

  • The comma before et here is a modern editorial choice to mark the pause:
    • Servus ianuam aperit, et dominus hospitem salutat.

You could also see it written without a comma:

  • Servus ianuam aperit et dominus hospitem salutat.

Both are acceptable in modern printed Latin. The presence or absence of the comma does not change the grammar.

Could this sentence be rearranged in other ways and still mean the same thing?

Yes. Because of the case endings, you can rearrange quite freely. For example, all of these can mean the same:

  • Ianum servus aperit, et hospitem dominus salutat.
  • Dominus hospitem salutat, et servus ianuam aperit.
  • Aperit servus ianuam, et hospitem salutat dominus.

The core roles remain:

  • servus and dominus (nominative) → subjects.
  • ianuam and hospitem (accusative) → direct objects.

Word order may change emphasis or style, but not the basic meaning.

Does servus always mean “slave,” or can it be softer, like “servant”?

servus most literally means “slave”, someone legally owned.

However, in some contexts:

  • It may be translated as “servant” in English when we want a less harsh word, especially in religious or historical texts.
  • But historically and socially, servus in Roman society usually implies actual slavery, not employed household staff.

So:

  • For everyday Classical Latin, think “slave” first.
  • Context and tone may lead translators to choose “servant.”
What exactly does hospitem mean? I’ve seen hospes translated as both “guest” and “host.”

The noun hospes, hospitis (m./f.) is interesting: in Latin it can mean both “guest” and “host”—essentially someone involved in a guest–host relationship.

In this sentence:

  • dominus hospitem salutat – “the master greets the host/guest?”

Here, context makes “guest” clearly correct:

  • The master (dominus) owns the house.
  • The hospes/hospitem is coming to the house and being greeted.
  • So hospitem is “the guest” who is welcomed.

Latin relies on context to decide whether hospes is “guest” or “host.”

Why don’t the verbs change for gender when the subject is servus (masculine) or when it could be feminine?

In Latin:

  • Verbs show person, number, tense, mood, and voice, but not gender in the finite forms (like aperit, salutat).
  • Gender is shown on nouns, adjectives, and participles, not on the normal present-tense verbs.

So:

  • Servus ianuam aperit. – “The (male) slave opens the door.”
  • Ancilla ianuam aperit. – “The (female) maid/slave-girl opens the door.”

In both, aperit looks exactly the same. We know the gender only from servus vs ancilla, not from the verb.