Mercator argentum accipit et reliquos nummos matri dat.

Latin does not have articles. There is no word exactly equivalent to English the or a/an.

So mercator can mean:

• the merchant
• a merchant
• sometimes just merchant, depending on context

The context or the English translation decides which is most natural.

Mercator is in the nominative singular, which is the case normally used for the subject.

Also, the verb accipit is third person singular, so it matches a singular subject: mercator.

So mercator is the one doing the actions:

• he receives something
• he gives something

Literally, argentum means silver. But depending on context, it can also mean money, especially money in the form of silver.

In this sentence, if the meaning has already been provided, the learner may just need to notice that Latin often uses a material word like silver in a broader sense.

Grammatically, argentum is accusative singular, so it is the direct object of accipit.

Because it is the direct object of accipit.

The verb accipit means receives or takes, and the thing received is put in the accusative:

• mercator argentum accipit = the merchant receives the silver / money

So argentum answers the question what does the merchant receive?

They are not exactly the same.

• argentum means silver and can also mean money more generally
• nummos specifically means coins

So the sentence distinguishes between:

• some amount of silver/money
• the remaining coins

This is a good example of Latin being more precise than a simple English gloss might first suggest.

Reliquos nummos means the remaining coins or the rest of the coins.

Both words are plural because they describe more than one coin:

• nummos = coins (accusative plural)
• reliquos = remaining / the rest of, agreeing with nummos

In Latin, adjectives must agree with the nouns they describe in:

• gender
• number
• case

So because nummos is masculine plural accusative, reliquos must also be masculine plural accusative.

Because matri is dative singular, and the dative case is often used for the indirect object.

With dat (gives):

• the thing given is in the accusative
• the person receiving it is in the dative

So:

• reliquos nummos = what he gives
• matri = to whom he gives them

That is why Latin uses matri: it means to the mother.

Because Latin often expresses meanings like to, for, or to/for someone by using the dative case instead of a separate preposition.

So English needs two words:

• to the mother

But Latin can do it with one inflected form:

• matri

This is one of the biggest differences between English and Latin: English often uses word order and prepositions, while Latin often uses case endings.

Yes. It is one sentence with the same subject, mercator, doing two actions:

• accipit = receives
• dat = gives

The conjunction et means and, linking the two verbs.

Latin often omits repeating the subject when it stays the same, just as English can:

• The merchant receives the money and gives the remaining coins to his mother.

Latin word order is more flexible than English word order because Latin uses case endings to show grammatical roles.

In English, word order is very important:

• The merchant gives the coins to the mother

In Latin, the endings already tell us:

• mercator = subject
• argentum and reliquos nummos = direct objects
• matri = indirect object

So Latin can arrange the words more freely for emphasis or style. This sentence is already fairly straightforward, but other orders would still be possible without changing the basic meaning.

Yes, sometimes English adds his, her, or their when translating, even if Latin does not explicitly say it.

By itself, matri simply means to the mother or to a mother, depending on context. If the broader context makes it clear whose mother is meant, English may naturally translate it as to his mother.

So Latin can leave some things unstated when they are obvious from context.

Both are third person singular present active indicative forms.

• accipit = he/she/it receives or takes
• dat = he/she/it gives

Since the subject is mercator, we understand them as:

• the merchant receives
• the merchant gives

A native English speaker often expects a separate subject pronoun like he, but Latin does not need one here because the verb ending already shows the person and number.

Because et is simply joining the second action to the first one:

• argentum accipit
• et reliquos nummos matri dat

Latin often places words in a way that groups related ideas together. Here the sentence moves naturally from the first action to the second:

1. he receives the silver/money
2. and he gives the remaining coins to the mother

There is no special grammar rule requiring this exact order; it is just a natural and clear arrangement.