Cum pater e taberna egressus est, matri panem recentem ostendit.

Here cum means when and introduces a time clause.

So Cum pater e taberna egressus est means when the father went out of the shop or after the father had gone out of the shop, depending on how smoothly you want to express it in English.

In Latin, cum can have several meanings, such as when, since, or although, so learners often need to decide which one fits the context. In this sentence, it is clearly temporal: when.

Egressus est is the perfect tense of the verb egredior, meaning go out or step out.

This verb is deponent, which means:

• it has passive-looking forms
• but it has an active meaning

So although egressus est looks a bit like has been gone out, it actually means went out or has gone out.

Its parts are:

• egressus = perfect participle form
• est = is/has as an auxiliary

Together they form the perfect tense of a deponent verb.

Because egressus agrees with pater.

Pater is:

• masculine
• singular
• nominative

So the participle must also be:

• masculine
• singular
• nominative

That gives egressus.

If the subject were feminine, you would get egressa est. If it were plural masculine, egressi sunt, and so on.

Pater is nominative singular because it is the subject of both verbs:

• egressus est
• ostendit

Even though the subject is stated only once, it naturally carries over into the main clause as well. So the father is both the one who went out and the one who showed.

E (or ex) means out of or from.

Here it takes the ablative case, so taberna is ablative singular.

So:

• taberna = shop in the ablative singular
• e taberna = out of the shop

Latin uses the ablative after many prepositions that express separation, place, means, and similar ideas.

Both e and ex mean the same thing here: out of or from.

In many textbooks, you will learn:

• e often appears before consonants
• ex often appears before vowels or h

But actual Latin usage is not completely rigid, and authors may use either form in some contexts. In this sentence, e taberna is perfectly normal.

Because matri is the indirect object: the person to whom something is shown.

The verb ostendere commonly works like this:

• show something = direct object in the accusative
• show to someone = indirect object in the dative

So:

• matri = to the mother
• panem recentem = fresh bread

A very literal structure is:

• He showed fresh bread to the mother

Matri is dative singular of mater, meaning mother.

The basic forms are:

• nominative: mater
• genitive: matris

From that stem matr-, the dative singular is matri.

This is a common third-declension noun pattern.

Because panem is the direct object of ostendit.

It is the thing being shown.

So:

• ostendit matri panem recentem = he showed the mother fresh bread or more naturally = he showed fresh bread to his mother

Panem is accusative singular of panis, meaning bread.

Recentem agrees with panem.

Since panem is:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

the adjective must also be:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

The adjective is recens, recentis, meaning fresh or recent. Its accusative singular masculine/feminine form is recentem.

So:

• panis recens = fresh bread in nominative
• panem recentem = fresh bread in accusative

In Latin, adjectives can come before or after the nouns they describe. Both positions are common.

So panem recentem simply means fresh bread. The adjective follows the noun here, but that does not change the basic meaning.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order because the endings show the grammatical relationships.

Because these verbs belong to different systems.

Ostendit is from ostendo, ostendere, a regular active verb. Its perfect tense is a single word:

• ostendit = he showed

But egredior is deponent, and its perfect tense is formed with:

• a participle
• plus a form of sum

So:

• egressus est = he went out

This difference is very common in Latin:

• regular active perfect: often one word
• deponent perfect: participle + sum

Latin often leaves out subject pronouns when they are unnecessary.

Ostendit by itself means:

• he showed
• she showed
• it showed

But in this sentence, the earlier subject pater makes it clear that the subject is the father.

So Latin does not need to say is ostendit. The subject is understood from context.

Because Latin regularly avoids repeating words that are already clear.

Once pater has been established as the subject, the sentence can continue with ostendit without saying pater again.

English can do something similar:

• When the father came out of the shop, he showed...

Latin often goes even further and simply omits he.

In this sentence, the most natural sense is that the going out happens first, and then the showing follows immediately after.

So the sequence is roughly:

1. the father went out of the shop
2. he showed the fresh bread to the mother

English may translate this as:

• When the father came out of the shop, he showed the mother the fresh bread or
• After the father had come out of the shop, he showed the mother the fresh bread

The exact English wording depends on style, but the Latin suggests a completed action followed by the next action.

You would look up egredior.

Latin dictionaries usually list deponent verbs in principal parts such as:

• egredior
• egredi
• egressus sum

So if you see egressus est, you should recognize it as coming from egredior.

You would look up ostendo.

A dictionary may give the principal parts as:

• ostendo
• ostendere
• ostendi
• ostentus

From those principal parts, ostendit is understood as the perfect tense: he/she/it showed.

Latin word order is flexible, so this arrangement is mainly stylistic.

Putting matri first in the main clause can make the recipient stand out slightly:

• to the mother he showed fresh bread

But this is only a slight effect. The endings, not the position, tell you the grammar:

• matri = dative, indirect object
• panem recentem = accusative, direct object

So even if the order changed, the core meaning would stay the same.

Yes, but the meaning would change because the case would change.

For example:

• matri = to the mother: indirect object
• matrem = the mother as a direct object

So matri panem recentem ostendit means:

• he showed fresh bread to the mother

But matrem would suggest that the mother herself was somehow the direct object of the verb, which is not what this sentence means.

This is a good example of why Latin case endings matter so much.