Si quis ramum vivum frangit, hortulana iram non ostendit, sed causam rogat.

After words like si (if), Latin often uses quis / quid instead of aliquis / aliquid.

So:

• quis = someone / anyone
• si quis = if anyone

This is a very common rule for indefinite pronouns in Latin:

• si quis = if anyone
• nisi quid = unless anything
• num quis = whether anyone

So si quis is exactly what you would expect here.

Quis is nominative singular, and it is the subject of frangit.

So in the clause:

• si quis ramum vivum frangit

the structure is:

• si = if
• quis = anyone / someone
• ramum vivum = a living branch
• frangit = breaks

So literally, if anyone breaks a living branch.

Both are accusative singular masculine.

• ramum is the direct object of frangit
• vivum agrees with ramum

Agreement means the adjective matches the noun in:

• gender
• number
• case

So:

• ramus = branch
• ramum = branch, as direct object
• vivus = living
• vivum = living, modifying ramum

Together: ramum vivum = a living branch

Latin word order is much freer than English word order. Both ramum vivum and vivum ramum are grammatically possible.

The adjective can come:

• before the noun
• after the noun

Sometimes the position gives a slight difference in emphasis or style, but often it is simply a matter of natural Latin phrasing.

So here ramum vivum is normal and means the same thing as vivum ramum.

Vivum means living or alive.

With ramum, it means a branch that is still alive on the plant or tree, not dead wood. So the idea is a live branch, a green branch, or a branch still growing.

It is the accusative singular masculine form of vivus, -a, -um.

Hortulana is nominative singular because it is the subject of the main clause:

• hortulana iram non ostendit, sed causam rogat

The person doing the actions ostendit and rogat is the gardener woman.

So:

• hortulana = the female gardener
• nominative = subject case

If it were an object, it would need a different case.

Yes. Hortulana is feminine and means female gardener.

The masculine form would be hortulanus.

So this sentence is specifically talking about a woman gardener, not a gardener of unspecified gender.

Iram is accusative because it is the direct object of ostendit.

• ira = anger
• iram = anger, as the thing being shown

So:

• hortulana iram non ostendit = the gardener does not show anger

That is exactly the normal use of the accusative for the direct object.

Non normally goes before the word it negates, and here it negates the verb ostendit.

So:

• iram non ostendit = does not show anger

This is the standard and expected placement in Latin.

Sed means but and introduces a contrast.

The contrast is:

• she does not show anger
• but she asks the reason

So sed connects the two opposite ideas in the main clause.

Rogo can be used in more than one way.

Very commonly, it can take:

• a person as object: aliquem rogo = I ask someone
• a thing as object: causam rogo = I ask the reason / I ask for the reason

So here causam is the direct object:

• causa = reason, cause
• causam rogat = she asks the reason or more natural English, she asks why

This is a perfectly natural Latin use of rogo.

The verbs are:

• frangit
• ostendit
• rogat

All are present indicative, third person singular.

Latin often uses the present tense for a general truth, habitual action, or vivid statement:

• If anyone breaks a living branch, the gardener does not show anger, but asks the reason.

This is not necessarily about one single event happening right now. It can mean something like a general rule or customary reaction.

Because this is a simple, open condition.

Latin often uses:

• si
  • indicative
• main clause in the indicative

when the condition is presented as real, possible, or general.

So:

• si quis ... frangit
• hortulana ... non ostendit ... rogat

means something like if anyone does this, she responds this way.

The subjunctive would suggest a different kind of condition or nuance, but it is not needed here.

All three are third person singular.

• frangit = he/she/it breaks
• ostendit = he/she/it shows
• rogat = he/she/it asks

You can tell the subject from the context:

• quis goes with frangit
• hortulana goes with ostendit and rogat

The word order is natural, but Latin does not depend on word order as heavily as English does, because the endings show the grammar.

This sentence is organized clearly:

1. condition first: si quis ramum vivum frangit
2. main response next: hortulana iram non ostendit
3. contrast added at the end: sed causam rogat

That order makes the logic easy to follow:

• if someone does X,
• the gardener does not do Y,
• but instead does Z.

So the word order is stylistically effective, even though the case endings are what really mark the grammar.