Breakdown of Caupo respondet se pretium minuere non posse, quia amphora vini iam vacua est.
Sign up free — start using our AI language tutor
Start learning LatinMaster Latin — from Caupo respondet se pretium minuere non posse, quia amphora vini iam vacua est 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 Caupo respondet se pretium minuere non posse, quia amphora vini iam vacua est.
Because the sentence contains indirect speech/reporting after respondet. The subject of the reported statement is the same as the subject of the main verb (caupo), so Latin uses the reflexive accusative se = himself (i.e., the innkeeper says that he…).
If it were talking about someone else, you’d use a non‑reflexive accusative like eum/illum.
It’s an indirect statement (often called accusative + infinitive).
- Main verb: respondet (he replies)
- Subject of the indirect statement: se (accusative)
- Verb of the indirect statement: non posse (infinitive)
So literally: The innkeeper replies that himself not to be able… → The innkeeper replies that he cannot…
Because after verbs of saying/thinking/answering (like respondet), Latin typically puts the reported clause into the infinitive (indirect statement).
So English “he says he cannot” becomes Latin respondet se non posse, not respondet quod non potest (though quod-clauses exist, they’re less standard for this kind of reporting).
posse means to be able and it commonly takes another infinitive to complete its meaning. Here:
- posse = to be able
- minuere = to reduce
So minuere non posse = to be unable to reduce (literally not to be able to reduce).
Because minuere is a transitive verb and it takes a direct object in the accusative.
So pretium is what is being reduced: to reduce the price.
Because the negation is aimed at the ability as a whole: non posse = cannot / is not able.
Latin often places non directly before the verb it negates; here that key verb is posse (the “ability” verb), not minuere.
respondet is present tense (replies/answers). In Latin indirect statement, the infinitive doesn’t “shift” tense the way English sometimes does; instead, Latin uses different infinitives (present/perfect/future) to show time relative to the main verb.
Here posse and minuere are present infinitives, indicating the inability is contemporaneous with the replying: he replies that he cannot (now) reduce…
quia introduces a causal clause (because …).
Causal clauses with quia normally use the indicative, so vacua est is straightforward: because the wine jar is already empty.
It’s a noun plus a genitive:
- amphora = a jar/amphora (nominative singular feminine here)
- vini = of wine (genitive singular of vinum)
So amphora vini = an amphora of wine / a wine-jar.
vacua is an adjective agreeing with amphora. Since amphora is feminine singular nominative, the adjective matches it:
- amphora (fem. nom. sg.)
- vacua (fem. nom. sg.)
Then est links them: the amphora is empty.
iam means already/now (by this time) and it modifies the idea that the amphora is empty already.
It’s placed before vacua est here, but Latin word order is flexible; you could also see amphora vini vacua iam est or similar, with slightly different emphasis.
Because minuere normally takes an accusative direct object for the thing being reduced: pretium minuere, poenam minuere, etc.
Latin doesn’t treat price as an indirect object here; it’s the direct object—the thing undergoing reduction.