Mane puella ientaculum parvum sumit, quia magna fames eam excitat.

Mane means in the morning or simply morning.

In this sentence it is being used as an adverb, so Latin does not need a preposition. English often says in the morning, but Latin can express that idea with just mane.

So:

• Mane = in the morning
• not in mane

Puella is the subject of sumit, so it is in the nominative singular.

The subject is the person or thing doing the action:

• puella = the girl
• sumit = takes / eats

So puella is nominative because the girl is the one eating the breakfast.

Ientaculum parvum is in the accusative singular because it is the direct object of sumit.

It answers the question what does the girl eat/take?

• puella = subject
• sumit = eats/takes
• ientaculum parvum = a small breakfast

So the breakfast is receiving the action, which is why it is accusative.

Because parvum has to agree with ientaculum.

Ientaculum is:

• neuter
• singular
• accusative

So the adjective must also be:

• neuter
• singular
• accusative

That gives parvum.

This is a basic rule in Latin: adjectives agree with the nouns they describe in gender, number, and case.

Ientaculum means breakfast.

More literally, it refers to the morning meal. In this sentence, it is the thing the girl is eating.

So:

• ientaculum = breakfast
• ientaculum parvum = a small breakfast

Yes, sumit literally means takes. It comes from sumo, sumere.

But Latin often uses sumere with food or drink in the sense of take, consume, or eat.

So here:

• literal idea: she takes a small breakfast
• natural English: she eats a small breakfast

That is a very normal kind of translation choice.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because the endings show the grammar.

Both ientaculum parvum and parvum ientaculum could be understood. The choice of order can depend on style, emphasis, or what sounds natural in a given passage.

In this sentence, ientaculum parvum is perfectly normal. The adjective after the noun does not change the basic meaning.

Quia means because and introduces a subordinate clause.

So the sentence is divided like this:

• Mane puella ientaculum parvum sumit = In the morning the girl eats a small breakfast
• quia magna fames eam excitat = because great hunger wakes her up

So quia tells you that the second part gives the reason for the first part.

Because fames is a feminine noun.

Even though English learners may not expect hunger to have grammatical gender, in Latin it does. Since fames is feminine singular nominative, the adjective must match it:

• fames = feminine singular nominative
• magna = feminine singular nominative

So:

• magna fames = great hunger

Yes. Magna fames is the subject of excitat.

That means the sentence is literally saying:

• great hunger wakes her

Latin is personifying hunger a little by making it the thing doing the action. This is perfectly natural.

So in the quia clause:

• magna fames = subject
• eam = direct object
• excitat = verb

Eam is the accusative singular feminine form of is, ea, id, meaning her here.

It refers back to puella. Since eam is the direct object of excitat, it has to be in the accusative:

• magna fames = great hunger
• eam = her
• excitat = wakes

So eam means her, and its form shows that she is receiving the action.

Not naturally in this sentence.

Latin can leave out a subject pronoun because the verb ending often shows the subject already. But here eam is not the subject; it is the object. If you removed it, the sentence would lose the word her:

• magna fames excitat = great hunger wakes up / arouses
• magna fames eam excitat = great hunger wakes her up

So eam is needed to show who is being awakened.

Both are present tense, third person singular, active, indicative.

• sumit = she takes / eats
• excitat = it wakes / stirs up

They are third person singular because the subjects are singular:

• puella = one girl
• fames = one hunger

Because classical Latin does not have articles like English the and a/an.

So:

• puella can mean the girl or a girl
• ientaculum parvum can mean a small breakfast or the small breakfast

You decide from the context which English wording is best.

Not always. Excitat can mean wakes up, stirs up, arouses, or drives into action, depending on context.

Here, since the subject is hunger, a natural English translation might be:

• great hunger wakes her
• great hunger rouses her
• she is woken by strong hunger

So excitat is broader than just physical waking, but wakes her up fits this sentence well.

Yes: the order is fairly natural for Latin, but it is not as fixed as English.

Latin often places important words where the writer wants emphasis. Here the sentence begins with Mane, which sets the time right away. Then we get:

• puella = subject
• ientaculum parvum = object
• sumit = verb

And after that:

• quia introduces the reason
• magna fames comes before eam excitat, which gives prominence to great hunger

So the word order is not random, but it is more flexible than in English because the case endings already show the grammatical roles.