Log inSign up

Postea dominus numerum pecuniae spectat et dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium.

Postea dominus numerum pecuniae spectat et dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium.
Afterwards the master looks at the amount of money and says that the price of the old tunic is too much.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Latin grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Latin now

Questions & Answers about Postea dominus numerum pecuniae spectat et dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium.

What does Postea mean, and what is its function in the sentence?

Postea is an adverb meaning afterwards, later, after that.

Functionally, it is a time adverb telling us when the master looks at the money and speaks: Afterwards, the master looks at the amount of money…

Word order in Latin is flexible, so Postea could also appear later in the sentence (e.g. Dominus postea numerum pecuniae spectat…), but putting it at the start gives a clear time-frame right away.

Why is dominus translated as “the master” when there is no word for “the” in Latin?

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

Dominus simply means master, lord, owner in general. When we translate into English, we have to choose whether it sounds more natural as “the master” or “a master” depending on the context.

Here, it is clearly a specific person in the story, so we say “the master” in English.

Why do we have numerum pecuniae instead of just pecuniam?

Numerum pecuniae literally means “the number of money”, but idiomatically it means “the amount of money”.

  • numerum = number, amount (accusative singular of numerus)
  • pecuniae = genitive singular of pecunia (of money)

Latin often uses a noun + genitive to express “amount/quantity of X”:

  • numerus pecuniae = the amount of money
  • copiārum numerus = the number of troops
  • multitudo hominum = a crowd of people

So numerum pecuniae spectat = he looks at the amount of money.

Using just pecuniam spectat would mean “he looks at the money”, but it would not explicitly bring out the idea of how much money there is.

Why is numerum in the accusative case?

Numerum is the direct object of the verb spectat (he looks at).

  • spectat is a transitive verb and normally takes a direct object in the accusative.
  • The thing being looked at is numerum pecuniae.
  • Therefore numerum is in the accusative singular: numerum pecuniae spectat = he looks at the amount of money.

The genitive pecuniae is dependent on numerum (amount of money), not on spectat.

Is there any difference between spectat and other verbs like videt or aspicit?

Yes, there are slight nuances:

  • spectat (from spectare) often implies looking at, watching, observing something, sometimes with some attention or duration.
  • videt (from videre) is more basic: he sees (perceives with the eyes).
  • aspicit (from aspicere) can have the sense of looking at, catching sight of, glancing at.

In this sentence, spectat nicely conveys the idea that the master is examining or looking carefully at the amount of money, rather than just accidentally seeing it.

Why is pretium in the accusative, even though in English “the price” is the subject of “is too high”?

This is because Latin is using the accusative + infinitive construction for reported speech / indirect statement.

  • dicit = he says
  • What he says is: pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium = that the price of the old tunic is too high

In Latin, an indirect statement works like this:

  1. Verb of saying/thinking/etc. (here dicit)
  2. Subject of the reported statement in the accusative (here pretium)
  3. Infinitive as the verb of the reported statement (here esse)

So:

  • Direct statement: Pretium tunicae veteris nimium est.
    (The price of the old tunic is too high.)
  • Indirect statement: Dicit pretium tunicae veteris nimium esse.
    (He says that the price of the old tunic is too high.)

The change from nominative pretium + est to accusative pretium + infinitive esse is typical of Latin indirect speech.

Why is esse (to be) used instead of est in dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium?

Because in Latin indirect speech (reported statements) use the infinitive form of the verb, not a finite form like est.

  • est = is (3rd person singular, present tense, finite verb)
  • esse = to be (infinitive)

Direct statement:

  • Pretium tunicae veteris nimium est.
    (The price of the old tunic is too high.)

Reported/indirect statement after dicit:

  • Dicit pretium tunicae veteris nimium esse.
    Literally: He says the price of the old tunic to be too high.

So esse is required by the accusative + infinitive pattern.

Could I instead say dicit quod pretium tunicae veteris nimium est?

You can form clauses with quod (dicit quod… = he says that…), especially in later or more colloquial Latin, but in classical Latin the normal, idiomatic way to express “he says that…” is with the accusative + infinitive construction:

  • More classical: dicit pretium tunicae veteris nimium esse
  • Less classical / later-style: dicit quod pretium tunicae veteris nimium est

So your quod sentence is understandable, but if you are trying to write in a classical style, you should prefer the accusative + infinitive.

Why are tunicae and veteris both genitive, and why don’t they have the same ending even though they agree?

Tunicae veteris together mean “of the old tunic”.

  • tunicae = genitive singular of tunica (1st declension, feminine)
  • veteris = genitive singular of vetus (3rd declension adjective meaning old)

They do agree in:

  • case: both genitive
  • number: both singular
  • gender: both feminine (because they describe the same tunic)

They look different because they belong to different declensions:

  • 1st declension genitive singular often ends in -ae (tunicae).
  • 3rd declension genitive singular often ends in -is (veteris from vetus, veteris).

So although the endings differ, grammatically they match perfectly: pretium tunicae veteris = the price of the old tunic.

What exactly does nimium mean here, and why is it in that form?

Nimium basically means too much, excessive, too great.

In this sentence:

  • pretium is neuter accusative singular (subject of the infinitive esse).
  • nimium is also neuter accusative singular, acting as a predicate adjective describing pretium in the indirect statement.

So pretium … esse nimium = that the price is too high / excessive.

You can think of it as:

  • nimium magnum (too big, too great) with magnum left out.
    Latin very often uses nimium alone in this sense.

Thus dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium =
He says that the price of the old tunic is too high / is too much.

Could the word order inside pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium be different?

Yes. Latin word order is quite flexible, especially inside clauses. All of the following would be grammatical and understandable:

  • dicit pretium tunicae veteris nimium esse
  • dicit pretium esse nimium tunicae veteris
  • dicit nimium esse pretium tunicae veteris

The chosen order pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium is quite natural:

  • pretium tunicae veteris keeps the whole noun phrase “the price of the old tunic” together.
  • esse nimium follows, giving what is being said about that price.

Changing the order can add subtle emphasis, but does not change the basic meaning.

Does the infinitive esse here express present, past, or future time relative to dicit?

In Latin indirect statement, the tense of the infinitive is relative to the main verb.

Here we have:

  • Main verb: dicit (present tense) = he says
  • Infinitive: esse (present infinitive)

A present infinitive after a present verb usually means the action is simultaneous with the main verb:

  • dicit pretium tunicae veteris esse nimium
    = He says that the price of the old tunic is too high (now).

If we wanted past time relative to dicit, we might use a perfect infinitive (fuisse nimium = has been / was too high).
For future relative time, a future infinitive could be used (futurum esse nimium, in a more elaborate form).