Tertia hora puer aegrotus iam dormit, et medicus de cura eius cum matre loquitur.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Latin grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Latin now

Questions & Answers about Tertia hora puer aegrotus iam dormit, et medicus de cura eius cum matre loquitur.

What does tertia hora mean literally, and what case is it?

Tertia hora literally means “in the third hour” or “at the third hour.”

  • hora = “hour”, 1st declension, feminine.
  • tertia = “third”, feminine singular to agree with hora.
  • It is in the ablative case, used as an ablative of time when: “at the third hour (of the day).”

So: Tertia hora puer aegrotus iam dormit = “At the third hour the sick boy is already sleeping.”

Could tertia hora mean “for three hours” instead of “at the third hour”?

Not in this form. Tertia hora with hora in the ablative and tertia as an ordinal (“third”) naturally means “in/at the third hour.”

To say “for three hours” Latin usually uses:

  • accusative of duration with a cardinal number:
    • tres horas dormit = “he sleeps for three hours”
    • iam tertiam horam dormit = “he has been sleeping for three hours now”

So tertia hora ≠ “for three hours”, but “in the third hour / at the third hour.”

Is puer aegrotus “the boy is sick” or “the sick boy”? How can I tell?

In this sentence puer aegrotus means “the sick boy.”

  • puer = “boy” (nominative singular)
  • aegrotus = “sick, ill” (nominative singular masculine adjective)

Latin often uses noun + adjective where English would say “the [adjective] [noun]:

  • puer bonus = “the good boy”
  • puer parvus = “the small boy”
  • puer aegrotus = “the sick boy”

If the sentence wanted to emphasize “the boy is sick” as a full statement, you’d typically see a form of esse:

  • puer aegrotus est = “the boy is sick”

Here, puer aegrotus is simply the subject of dormit (“sleeps”): the sick boy sleeps.

Why is aegrotus after puer? Does word order change the meaning?

The word order puer aegrotus is completely normal; Latin word order is quite flexible.

  • The essential thing is agreement:
    • puer (masc. nom. sg.)
    • aegrotus (masc. nom. sg.)

Because they match in gender, number, and case, we know aegrotus goes with puer, regardless of order. Putting the adjective after the noun is very common and does not change the basic meaning; it still means “the sick boy.”

What does iam add to dormit? Is it “already” or “now”?

Iam can mean both “already” and “now” depending on context. Here it suggests:

  • “already”: “By the third hour, the sick boy is already sleeping.”
  • It can also carry a sense of “by now / now at this point.”

In many Latin sentences, iam + present tense can be translated in English with a present perfect or “has been”:

  • iam dormit in some contexts = “he has been sleeping (for some time already)”

In your sentence, a natural translation is:

  • “By the third hour, the sick boy is already sleeping.”
What tense is dormit, and how should I translate it into English?

Dormit is 3rd person singular, present tense, active, indicative of dormire (“to sleep”):

  • dormit = “he/she/it sleeps,” “is sleeping”

A very literal translation:
Tertia hora puer aegrotus iam dormit =
“At the third hour the sick boy already sleeps / is already sleeping.”

Depending on context and the presence of iam, English might choose:

  • “The sick boy has already been sleeping since the third hour” but grammatically it is straightforward present tense in Latin.
What is medicus doing grammatically in the sentence?

Medicus is the subject of the second verb loquitur:

  • medicus … loquitur = “the doctor speaks / is speaking”

It is nominative singular masculine:

  • medicus = “doctor” (subject)
  • loquitur = “is speaking”

So in the second clause:

  • medicus de cura eius cum matre loquitur =
    • “the doctor is talking with the mother about his care.”
Why does loquitur end in -tur if it means “is speaking”? Isn’t -tur passive?

Loquitur looks passive but has active meaning because loqui is a deponent verb.

  • Principal parts: loquor, loqui, locutus sum = “to speak, talk”
  • Form here: loquitur = 3rd person singular present indicative (deponent)

Deponent verbs:

  • Use passive forms
  • Have active meanings

So loquitur = “he/she/it speaks” or “is speaking,” not “is spoken.”

Thus:

  • medicus … loquitur = “the doctor is speaking / talking …”
Why is it de cura with de, instead of just using a plain genitive or another case?

Latin commonly uses de + ablative to mean “about / concerning”:

  • de cura = “about the care, concerning the care”

Here:

  • cura = “care, attention, treatment” (ablative singular with de)

So:

  • medicus de cura eius … loquitur =
    • “the doctor is speaking about his care …”

This de + ablative construction is very standard after verbs of speaking, thinking, etc.:

  • loqui de = “to talk about”
  • cogitare de = “to think about”
What exactly does cura mean here? Is it “cure” or “care”?

Cura in Latin primarily means:

  • care, concern, attention, responsibility, treatment

In a medical context like this, de cura eius is best understood as:

  • “about his care” or “about his treatment”

Latin would use other words for “cure” as a result, such as remedium (remedy), sanatio (healing), etc. So here, cura focuses on how the boy is being looked after, treated, or cared for.

Why is it eius and not suus in de cura eius?

Eius is the non‑reflexive genitive singular of is, ea, id (“he, she, it”), meaning “his / her / its” (belonging to someone other than the subject of the clause).

In medicus de cura eius cum matre loquitur:

  • The subject is medicus (“the doctor”).
  • Eius refers not to the doctor, but to another person, the sick boy.

So cura eius = “his care”, i.e. the care of the boy.

If we used suus, -a, -um:

  • suus is reflexive, meaning “his own / her own / its own” referring back to the subject.
  • de cura sua here would mean “about his own care” where “his” = the doctor’s own care, which is not what we want.

Thus eius correctly points to the boy, not to the subject medicus.

What case is matre in cum matre, and why is there no word for “his” before “mother”?

Matre is in the ablative singular:

  • From mater, matris (mother), 3rd declension.
  • cum + ablative = “with [someone]”
  • cum matre = “with (the) mother”

Latin often omits possessive pronouns (his, her) where English would use them, especially with close family members, when the owner is obvious from context:

  • cum matre here naturally reads as “with his mother” (the sick boy’s mother).

If Latin wanted to be explicit, it could say:

  • cum matre eius = “with his mother” but it’s usually unnecessary when the relationship is clear.
Is the comma before et doing anything special, and how are the two parts of the sentence related?

The comma simply separates two main clauses joined by et (“and”):

  1. Tertia hora puer aegrotus iam dormit
    – “At the third hour the sick boy is already sleeping,”

  2. (et) medicus de cura eius cum matre loquitur
    – “and the doctor is speaking with (his) mother about his care.”

They share the same time frame (the “third hour”) but have different subjects:

  • First clause subject: puer aegrotus
  • Second clause subject: medicus

The et coordinates two simultaneous actions: the boy is sleeping, and at the same time the doctor is talking with the boy’s mother about his care.