Cum cena parata erit, omnes dicent holera, pira, et ficus in hoc macello recentissima esse.

Here cum means when.

This is a simple temporal clause: when the dinner has been prepared. In that use, Latin normally takes the indicative, not the subjunctive.

The subjunctive after cum is common in other uses, such as:

• since
• although
• background or circumstantial when

But in this sentence, cum is just marking time, so erit is indicative.

Parata erit is the future perfect passive of parare, meaning to prepare.

It is built from:

• parata — the perfect passive participle
• erit — the future of esse

So literally it means something like will have been prepared.

Also, parata is feminine singular because it agrees with cena, which is feminine singular.

Latin often uses the future perfect when one future action will be completed before another future action happens.

That is exactly the relationship here:

1. the dinner will be prepared
2. then everyone will speak

So:

• cum cena parata erit = when the dinner has been prepared / once the dinner is ready
• omnes dicent = everyone will say

The future perfect makes the sequence very clear.

Because cena is the subject of the passive verb.

In English, we say the dinner will have been prepared.
In that kind of passive sentence, the dinner is the grammatical subject.

So in Latin:

• cena = nominative singular
• it is the subject of parata erit

Because after a verb of saying, Latin very often uses an indirect statement.

The normal pattern is:

• a verb of saying, thinking, knowing, perceiving, etc.
• then an accusative + infinitive

Here:

• dicent = they will say
• esse = to be
• the reported statement is holera, pira, et ficus ... recentissima esse

A direct version would be:

• Holera, pira, et ficus in hoc macello recentissima sunt

After dicent, Latin changes that into indirect statement:

• holera, pira, et ficus in hoc macello recentissima esse

Syntactically, they are the subjects of the infinitive esse in the indirect statement, so they are in the accusative.

That can be confusing because their forms look like nominatives.

Why?

• holera is a neuter plural form, and neuter plural nominative and accusative are the same
• pira is also neuter plural, so nominative and accusative are the same
• ficus has the same form for nominative plural and accusative plural

So although they look like nominatives, in this sentence they function as accusative subjects of esse.

Because the adjective is describing a group of things made up of nouns of mixed gender.

The nouns are:

• holera — neuter plural
• pira — neuter plural
• ficus — feminine plural

When Latin has several non-person nouns together, especially mixed genders, it often uses a neuter plural adjective for the whole group.

So recentissima means freshest and agrees with the combined idea of vegetables, pears, and figs as a set of things.

It is the superlative of recens, meaning fresh.

So recentissima means:

• freshest
• or sometimes very fresh, depending on context

In a sentence about produce in a market, the most natural sense is probably the freshest.

Because in with the ablative means in or at a place.

So:

• in hoc macello = in this market or at this market

Both words are ablative singular:

• hoc — ablative singular neuter
• macello — ablative singular of macellum

If Latin wanted to express motion into the market, it would use in with the accusative instead.

Because Latin word order is much freer than English word order.

Putting esse at the end is very normal, especially in an indirect statement. Latin often saves the infinitive until the end of the reported clause.

So the order may feel unusual from an English point of view, but it is perfectly natural in Latin:

• dicent introduces the statement
• esse closes it

That final position can also make the structure of the sentence feel neatly complete.