Learn Hardcore Latin: Postquam domina fabulam narravit, pueri in lectis dormiunt et manus quietae sunt. - After the lady has told the story, the boys sleep in their beds and their hands are at rest.

Postquam domina fabulam narravit = After the mistress told the story…
The main clause then follows: pueri in lectis dormiunt et manus quietae sunt.

In Latin, postquam is usually followed by a perfect tense verb (here narravit) even when English might use a simple past (told) or past perfect (had told).

Why is narravit (perfect) used after postquam instead of something like narraverat (pluperfect)?

Latin tends to use the perfect indicative after postquam to indicate an action that is completed before the action of the main clause.

Postquam domina fabulam narravit literally: After the mistress has told the story (i.e. once she has finished).
English often prefers: After the mistress had told the story or after the mistress told the story.

Classical Latin regularly uses perfect (not necessarily pluperfect) after postquam to show that the action is simply completed before the next one. Narraverat would be grammatically possible but is much less typical in this kind of construction.

Why are dormiunt and sunt in the present tense when narravit is in the past?

The mix of tenses reflects sequence in time:

narravit (perfect): a completed past action – the mistress finished telling the story.
dormiunt (present): a current or ongoing situation – the boys are (now) sleeping.
sunt (present): also current – their hands are (now) still.

So the sense is: After the mistress (has) told the story, the boys are sleeping in their beds and their hands are still.
Latin can easily combine a completed past action with present results or states, just as English can: After he finished, everyone is quiet. (said from a present viewpoint).

What case is domina, and how can we tell it is the subject?

Domina is nominative singular, and it is the subject of narravit.

Clues:

The dictionary form domina, -ae is first declension; the -a ending is typical of nominative singular for first declension feminine nouns.
It makes good sense as the doer of the action: the mistress told the story.

So domina narravit = the mistress told.

What case is fabulam, and why does it have that ending?

Fabulam is accusative singular, used as the direct object of narravit.

fabula, fabulae (f.) = story.
First declension accusative singular ending is -am.
The direct object receives the action of the verb: domina fabulam narravit = the mistress told the story.

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

Pueri is nominative plural, functioning as the subject of dormiunt.

puer, pueri (m.) = boy.
Nominative plural ending is -i.
So pueri dormiunt = the boys are sleeping.

It also carries over as the understood subject of sunt in et manus quietae sunt; Latin usually does not repeat the subject if it stays the same.

What case is in lectis, and why is in followed by the ablative here?

Lectis is ablative plural, and in + ablative expresses location (“in, on, at” where something is).

lectus, lecti (m.) = bed.
Ablative plural ending is -is.
in lectis = in (their) beds (place where they are sleeping).

Remember:

in + ablative = in/on (static location).
in + accusative = into/onto (motion toward).

What is going on with manus quietae sunt? Why is manus plural but looks singular, and why quietae?

Several points:

manus here is nominative plural of manus, manus (f.), a 4th declension noun meaning hand.
- Nominative singular: manus
- Nominative plural: manus (same spelling, different number).
- The context (quietae sunt, and the earlier pueri, plural) shows it is plural: hands.
quietae is a predicate adjective, feminine nominative plural, agreeing with manus.
- quietus, -a, -um (quiet, still).
- Feminine nominative plural: quietae.
- manus quietae sunt = the hands are still/at rest.

So:

manus (nominative plural, fem.)
quietae (fem. nom. plural, agreeing with manus)
sunt (3rd person plural of sum)

Together: and (their) hands are still.
The “their” is understood from context (the boys’ hands), not expressed in Latin.

Why is there no explicit word for “their” in manus quietae sunt?

Latin often omits possessive pronouns (meus, tuus, suus, etc.) when the owner is clear from context.

The sentence talks about pueri (the boys).
Then: manus quietae sunt naturally means the (boys’) hands are still.

If Latin wanted to emphasise whose hands they are, it could say manus suae quietae sunt (their own hands are still), but that is not necessary here.

Why is the verb placed at the end of the subordinate clause: Postquam domina fabulam narravit?

Classical Latin prefers to place the finite verb at or near the end of a clause, though this is not a rigid rule.

Postquam (subordinating conjunction) starts the clause.
domina fabulam (subject and object) follow.
narravit (verb) comes at the end.

So the order Postquam + subject + object + verb is very typical for Latin. English is more fixed in word order (Subject–Verb–Object), but Latin relies mainly on endings (cases, verb endings) to show grammatical roles, and word order is more flexible.

Is there any special reason for the word order pueri in lectis dormiunt et manus quietae sunt?

This is a natural, fairly neutral Latin word order:

pueri – subject of dormiunt.
in lectis – prepositional phrase (location), placed between subject and verb.
dormiunt – verb, often near the end of the clause.
et – connects the two main clauses.
manus – new subject.
quietae – predicate adjective.
sunt – copula (“are”), placed last.

It could be rearranged (e.g. pueri dormiunt in lectis) without changing the basic meaning, but the given order is stylistically smooth and idiomatic for Latin.