Servus statim currit et celer est, domina autem lente ambulat et tarda est.

The servant runs immediately and is quick, but the lady walks slowly and is slow.

Breakdown of Servus statim currit et celer est, domina autem lente ambulat et tarda est.

• esse: to be
• et: and
• ambulare: to walk
• lente: slowly
• currere: to run
• servus: the servant
• domina: the lady of the house
• autem: but
• statim: immediately
• celer: quick
• tardus: slow

Questions & Answers about Servus statim currit et celer est, domina autem lente ambulat et tarda est.

Why does servus end in -us and domina end in -a? What are their grammatical roles?

Both servus and domina are nouns in the nominative singular, which is the case normally used for the subject of the sentence.

• servus = slave, servant (masculine)
  
  • -us ending → nominative singular masculine of a typical -us noun (2nd declension).
• domina = mistress, lady (feminine)
  
  • -a ending → nominative singular feminine of a typical -a noun (1st declension).

In this sentence:

• servus is the subject of currit and est (the one who runs and is quick).
• domina is the subject of ambulāt and est (the one who walks and is slow).

What does autem mean, and why is it in the middle of the clause instead of at the beginning?

autem is a conjunction that usually means “but, however, on the other hand.”

In Latin, autem is a “postpositive” word: it normally cannot stand first in its clause. Instead, it typically comes second (or near the beginning) in the clause:

• domina autem lente ambulat
  Literally: the mistress, however, slowly walks.

Even though autem is not at the very start, English normally translates it as if it were:
“but the mistress walks slowly” or “the mistress, however, walks slowly.”

Why is servus statim currit translated “the slave immediately runs / runs immediately”? Do word order and adverb position matter?

Latin word order is flexible compared to English.

• servus statim currit
  
  • servus = subject (“the slave”)
  • statim = adverb (“immediately”)
  • currit = verb (“runs”)

The adverb statim can move around without changing the core meaning much:

• servus statim currit
• statim servus currit
• servus currit statim

All can be understood as “the slave immediately runs” / “the slave runs immediately.”

Differences in Latin word order can add subtle emphasis:

• statim servus currit might slightly highlight “immediately”.
• servus currit statim might feel more like “the slave runs, and he does so immediately.”

But grammatically, the endings (not the order) show who does what.

What is the difference between statim, lente, celer, and tarda? Why do some have -e and others don’t?

These words play two different grammatical roles:

1. Adverbs (describe how an action is done)

   • statim = immediately
   • lente = slowly
     They modify verbs:
   • statim currit = he runs immediately
   • lente ambulat = she walks slowly

2. Adjectives (describe a noun or act as part of “is X”)

   • celer = quick, fast
   • tarda = slow (feminine form)

In this sentence they are predicate adjectives: they come after est and describe the subject:

• servus … celer est = the slave is quick
• domina … tarda est = the mistress is slow

So:

• statim, lente → adverbs (modifying currit, ambulat)
• celer, tarda → adjectives (predicated of servus, domina via est)

Why is it celer est and not something like celere est or celeriter est?

Because celer is an adjective agreeing with servus:

• servus is masculine singular.
• The adjective must also be masculine singular nominative → celer.

So servus celer est literally = the slave is quick.

Other forms:

• celere – neuter singular form of the adjective; would agree with a neuter noun, not servus.
• celeriter – the adverb derived from celer, meaning quickly.

You would use celeriter to modify a verb:

• servus celeriter currit = the slave runs quickly.

In the given sentence, we are not saying he runs quickly, but that he is quick, which needs the adjective form: celer.

Why is it lente ambulat but tarda est? Why not lente est or tarde ambulat?

We have two different ideas:

1. How does she walk? → needs an adverb.

   • lente ambulat = she walks slowly.
     lente is an adverb modifying the verb ambulāt.

2. What is she like? / What is her quality? → needs an adjective.

   • tarda est = she is slow.
     tarda is an adjective agreeing with domina (feminine singular).

Alternatives that are also correct Latin but say slightly different things:

• domina tarde ambulat – also the mistress walks slowly, using the adverb tarde (from tardus, -a, -um) instead of lente.
• domina lenta est – the mistress is slow (adjective from lentus, -a, -um).
• You could even say: domina lente ambulat et lenta est – the mistress walks slowly and is slow.

The sentence you have contrasts two different words:

• lente (slowly, as an adverb)
• tarda (slow, as an adjective describing her).

Why does tarda end in -a here?

tarda is the feminine nominative singular form of the adjective tardus, tarda, tardum (slow).

It must agree with the noun domina:

• domina is feminine, singular, nominative.
• So the adjective describing it must also be feminine singular nominative: tarda.

If we were describing a masculine noun:

• servus tardus est = the slave is slow.

If a neuter noun:

• oppidum tardum est = the town is slow (a bit odd semantically, but grammatically fine).

Could the second est be left out? For example, could we say: domina autem lente ambulat et tarda?

In classical-style Latin, it is possible to omit a repeated form of “to be” (est) when it is clearly understood, especially in short, balanced phrases.

So domina autem lente ambulat et tarda would likely be understood as:

• but the mistress walks slowly and (is) slow.

However:

• It is clearer and more typical for beginners to keep est.
• Many teaching grammars will insist on domina autem lente ambulat et tarda est so learners can see the full structure.

So, yes, omitting est is grammatically possible in real Latin, but the original is especially good for learners.

Why isn’t there a pronoun like he or she? Why don’t we see “ille currit” or “ea ambulat”?

Latin normally does not need personal subject pronouns when the verb ending already tells you who is acting.

• currit = he/she/it runs (3rd person singular)
• The noun servus makes it clear that he is the subject.
• ambulāt = he/she/it walks
• The noun domina makes it clear that she is the subject.

So servus currit already contains the idea “he runs”, and domina ambulat already contains “she walks”.

Latin uses explicit pronouns like is, ea, ille, illa mainly for emphasis, contrast, or clarity, not routinely as in English.

Why is it currit and ambulat, and what do those endings tell us?

Both currit and ambulāt are 3rd person singular, present tense, active, indicative:

• currit from currere = to run

  • curr- = verb stem
  • -it = “he/she/it (does it) now”

• ambulāt from ambulāre = to walk

  • ambul-ā- = stem
  • -t = “he/she/it (does it) now”

In each case:

• 3rd person → “he/she/it” (but usually implied, not written).
• Singular → one person.
• Present → happening now.

So:

• servus currit = the slave runs / is running
• domina ambulat = the mistress walks / is walking

Why is et used before celer est and tarda est? How does it differ from autem?

In the sentence:

• servus statim currit et celer est
• domina autem lente ambulat et tarda est

There are two types of connectors:

1. et = simple “and”

   • It links two actions or states belonging to the same subject:
     • statim currit et celer est
       → he runs immediately *and he is quick*
     • lente ambulat et tarda est
       → she walks slowly *and she is slow*.

2. autem = “but, however”, contrasting two different subjects/clause ideas:

   • servus …, domina autem …
     → the slave …, but the mistress, however …

So:

• et joins things within one subject’s description.
• autem contrasts the slave’s part with the mistress’s part.

Why doesn’t Latin say “the slave” and “the mistress” with words like the or a?

Latin has no articles like English “the” or “a/an.”

A Latin noun like servus on its own can mean:

• the slave
• a slave
• or just slave (in general), depending on context.

Similarly domina can mean:

• the mistress or a mistress.

The decision “a” vs “the” is made when translating into English based on context, not from a separate Latin word.