Breakdown of Venditor piscem et panem civibus vendit, nummos parvos accipit, sed pretium minuere non vult.
et
and
parvus
small
panis
the bread
non
not
sed
but
velle
to want
piscis
the fish
vendere
to sell
pretium
the price
accipere
to receive
civis
the citizen
venditor
the seller
nummus
the coin
minuere
to lower
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 Venditor piscem et panem civibus vendit, nummos parvos accipit, sed pretium minuere non 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 Venditor piscem et panem civibus vendit, nummos parvos accipit, sed pretium minuere non vult.
Why does venditor mean “the seller,” and what case is it in?
Venditor is a 3rd-declension noun meaning seller (literally “one who sells”). Here it’s nominative singular, so it’s the subject of the sentence: the seller is doing the actions (vendit, accipit, vult).
Why are piscem and panem in that form?
Piscem (fish) and panem (bread) are both accusative singular because they are direct objects of vendit: the seller sells fish and bread. Their dictionary forms are piscis and panis.
What does civibus mean here, and why isn’t it accusative too?
Civibus is dative plural of civis (“citizen”). With vendere (“to sell”), Latin commonly uses the dative for the person you sell to (an “indirect object” idea): he sells fish and bread to the citizens.
Why is the verb vendit repeated? Isn’t one “sells” enough?
Latin often repeats a verb (or uses separate verbs) to keep clauses clear and balanced. Here the first clause is complete on its own: Venditor … vendit. The next clause adds another action: nummos … accipit. Repeating the verb isn’t required in every Latin sentence, but it’s very normal style.
What tense is vendit and accipit?
Both vendit and accipit are present tense, 3rd person singular: “he sells / he is selling” and “he receives / he is receiving.” In context it often functions as a habitual present: what the seller typically does.
Why is it nummos parvos and not another case?
Because nummos is the direct object of accipit (“he receives coins”), so it’s accusative plural. Parvos is an adjective modifying nummos, so it matches in case, number, and gender: masculine accusative plural. Together: small coins.
Does parvos nummos mean “a small amount of money” or literally “small coins”?
Literally it means small coins. Depending on context, that can imply small change or low-denomination coins, but grammatically it’s describing the coins, not directly the total amount.
What is the role of sed?
Sed means but, introducing a contrast: the seller takes small coins (accipit), but he does not want to reduce the price (pretium minuere non vult).
Why is pretium in the accusative? Isn’t “price” sometimes genitive in Latin?
Here pretium is the direct object of the infinitive minuere (“to reduce”): “to reduce the price.” So it’s accusative singular. A genitive like pretii would mean “of the price,” which is a different relationship.
How does minuere work with vult?
Minuere is the present active infinitive (“to reduce”). With verbs like vult (“he wants”), Latin commonly uses a complementary infinitive: non vult minuere / minuere non vult = “he does not want to reduce.”
Why is the negation placed as minuere non vult instead of non vult minuere?
Both are possible. Minuere non vult often gives a bit more focus to the action being rejected (“reduce—he doesn’t want to”). Non vult minuere is more neutral: “he doesn’t want to reduce.” Latin word order is flexible and can signal emphasis.
Do the commas mean anything grammatical in Latin, or are they just for readability?
Mostly readability. Each comma separates a clause with the same subject venditor understood: 1) Venditor … vendit 2) (venditor) nummos … accipit 3) sed (venditor) … non vult Latin can be written with different punctuation conventions, especially across editions.
Is civibus the only way to express “to the citizens,” or could Latin use a preposition?
The most natural here is the dative: civibus. You can use a preposition like ad with accusative in some contexts, but with vendere the dative for the buyer/recipient is straightforward and very common.
How do we know the subject stays the same across all three clauses?
Because the first clause explicitly gives the subject venditor, and the following verbs (accipit, vult) are 3rd person singular with no new nominative noun introduced. Latin often omits repeated subjects when they’re clear from context.