Dominus servo imperat ut ianuam statim claudat.

Because imperare takes the dative for the person being ordered.

So in Dominus servo imperat, servo means to the slave or at the slave in the sense of directing a command to him.

This is different from English, where we say the master orders the slave and use a direct object. Latin handles this verb differently:

• dominus = subject, nominative
• servo = indirect object, dative
• imperat = commands

A learner often expects an accusative here, but with imperare, the dative is normal.

Here ut introduces a command clause (also called an indirect command).

Latin often expresses someone orders another person to do something as:

imperat + dative person + ut + subjunctive verb

So:

• servo imperat = he gives an order to the slave
• ut ianuam statim claudat = that he close the door at once

In natural English, we usually translate this more simply as orders the slave to close the door at once, but Latin builds it with ut + a subjunctive clause.

Because after ut in an indirect command, Latin uses the subjunctive mood.

So claudat is not just he closes. It means something like:

• that he close
• to close (in smoother English translation)

This is one of the most important uses of the subjunctive in Latin:

• ut
  • subjunctive = command, purpose, result, etc.
• Here it is specifically an indirect command

So imperat ut claudat = he orders that he close / he orders him to close.

Claudit is indicative, meaning he closes as a statement of fact.

But this sentence is not saying that the slave actually closes the door as a plain fact. It is reporting the master's order. Because it is an indirect command, Latin uses the subjunctive:

• claudit = he closes
• claudat = that he close

So ut ianuam statim claudat does not mean he closes the door immediately. It means that he should close the door immediately.

Because the main verb is imperat, which is in the present tense, and Latin normally follows the sequence of tenses.

After a main verb in a primary tense (such as present, future, or perfect with present force), the subordinate verb in an indirect command is usually in the present subjunctive if the action is simultaneous or future relative to the main verb.

So:

• imperat = he orders
• claudat = that he close

If the main verb were past, Latin would normally use the imperfect subjunctive instead:

• Dominus servo imperavit ut ianuam statim clauderet.
• The master ordered the slave to close the door at once.

The subject of claudat is understood to be the slave.

Latin often leaves a subject unstated when it is clear from context. Here, the master orders the slave, and the clause with ut tells what the slave is to do. So the understood meaning is:

The master orders the slave that he should close the door at once.

That he refers to the slave.

If Latin wanted to make the subject explicit, it could do so, but it often does not need to.

Because ianuam is the direct object of claudat.

The verb claudere means to close, and the thing being closed is put in the accusative:

• ianua = door (nominative)
• ianuam = door as direct object (accusative)

So in ut ianuam statim claudat, the slave is supposed to close the door.

The sentence breaks down like this:

• Dominus = subject, nominative, the master
• servo = dative, person receiving the order, to the slave
• imperat = main verb, orders / gives an order
• ut = introduces indirect command
• ianuam = direct object of claudat, the door
• statim = adverb, immediately / at once
• claudat = present subjunctive, that he close

So the pattern is:

subject + imperare + dative person + ut + subjunctive

That is a very common Latin construction.

Because Latin word order is fairly flexible, and adverbs like statim can often be placed in different positions.

Here statim goes right before claudat, which naturally ties at once to the action close:

• ut ianuam statim claudat

Latin could move statim around without changing the basic meaning very much, for example:

• ut statim ianuam claudat
• ut ianuam claudat statim

The chosen order is simply a natural one.

The word order is somewhat important for style and emphasis, but the grammar is mostly shown by the endings, not by position.

English depends heavily on word order:

• The master orders the slave

Latin depends more on case endings:

• Dominus is nominative, so it is the subject.
• servo is dative, so it is the person commanded.
• ianuam is accusative, so it is the thing being closed.

That means Latin can vary the order more freely. For example, these would still be understandable:

• Servo dominus imperat ut ianuam statim claudat.
• Dominus imperat servo ut ianuam statim claudat.

The original order is straightforward and natural, but not the only possible one.

In standard prose with imperare, Latin normally uses the construction seen here: dative + ut + subjunctive.

So:

• servo imperat ut claudat

This is the regular classical way to say orders the slave to close.

English uses to close, but Latin does not usually match that with a simple infinitive after imperare in this kind of sentence. That is why the structure may feel unfamiliar to an English speaker.

In an indirect command, Latin uses ne instead of ut for a negative command.

So:

• Dominus servo imperat ne ianuam statim claudat.

This means:

• The master orders the slave not to close the door at once.

That is useful to remember:

• ut = positive indirect command
• ne = negative indirect command

Imperat is:

• 3rd person singular
• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood

It comes from impero, imperare, meaning to command.

So imperat means he orders or the master orders.

This main verb is what triggers the indirect command construction that follows.