Post iudicium mercator pecuniam reddere vult.
After the trial the merchant wants to return the money.
Breakdown of Post iudicium mercator pecuniam reddere vult.
mercator
the merchant
velle
to want
post
after
pecunia
the money
iudicium
the trial
reddere
to return
AI Language TutorTry it ↗
“What's the best way to learn Latin grammar?”
Latin grammar becomes intuitive with practice. Focus on understanding the core patterns first — how sentences are structured, how verbs change form, and how words relate to each other. Our course breaks these concepts into small lessons so you can build understanding step by step.
Sign up free — start using our AI language tutor
Start learning LatinMaster Latin — from Post iudicium mercator pecuniam reddere vult to fluency
All course content and exercises are completely free — no paywalls, no trial periods.
- ✓ Infinitely deep — unlimited vocabulary and grammar
- ✓ Fast-paced — build complex sentences from the start
- ✓ Unforgettable — efficient spaced repetition system
- ✓ AI tutor to answer your grammar questions
More from this lesson
Questions & Answers about Post iudicium mercator pecuniam reddere vult.
How can I tell what the subject is in Post iudicium mercator pecuniam reddere vult?
The subject is mercator because it is in the nominative case (the default case for the subject). It’s the person doing the wanting: mercator ... vult = the merchant wants.
Why is pecuniam in that form?
Pecuniam is accusative singular, used here as the direct object of reddere. It answers what the merchant wants to return: he wants to return the money.
Why do we have an infinitive reddere instead of a finite verb like reddit?
Because vult (he wants) commonly takes a complementary infinitive:
- vult reddere = he wants to return
Using reddit would mean he returns (a statement of fact), not he wants to return.
What tense and person is vult?
Vult is 3rd person singular present indicative of velle (to want): he/she/it wants. Here it refers to mercator.
Why is post followed by iudicium, and what case is iudicium?
Post is a preposition that takes the accusative when it means after (time). Iudicium here is accusative singular: post iudicium = after the trial/judgment.
How do I know iudicium is accusative if it looks the same as nominative?
Because iudicium is a 2nd-declension neuter noun, and neuter nominative singular = neuter accusative singular. So you rely on the grammar cue: the preposition post requires accusative.
Is the word order important here? Could it be rearranged?
Latin word order is flexible because cases show grammatical roles. You could see variations like:
- Mercator post iudicium pecuniam reddere vult.
- Pecuniam mercator post iudicium reddere vult.
They keep the same basic meaning, though the emphasis can shift (fronted words often feel more prominent).
Does post iudicium mean “after the trial” or “after the judgment”? Which is better?
Both are possible because iudicium can mean trial, judgment, or court decision depending on context. The grammar stays the same either way; context tells you which nuance fits.
What exactly does pecunia mean? Is it “a coin” or “money” in general?
Pecunia usually means money in a general sense (wealth, funds), not specifically a coin. Pecuniam reddere often corresponds to to pay back/return the money.
Why isn’t there a word for “the” (like “the merchant”)?
Latin has no definite article. Whether you translate mercator as a merchant or the merchant depends on context.
Could reddere mean something other than “return” here?
Yes. Reddere can mean return, give back, render, or even pay. With pecuniam, it very naturally means pay back / return the money.
How should I pronounce the key words (roughly, in Classical Latin)?
A common Classical-style pronunciation is:
- post ≈ post (short o)
- iūdicium ≈ yoo-DI-kee-um (with iū- like yoo)
- mercātor ≈ mer-KAA-tor (long ā)
- pecūniam ≈ pe-KOO-nee-am (long ū)
- reddere ≈ RED-de-re
- vult ≈ woolt (with v like English w in many Classical reconstructions)