Nescio utrum pastor cras bovem ad forum ducat an domi maneat.

Utrum ... an introduces an indirect question meaning whether ... or.

So:

• utrum pastor cras bovem ad forum ducat
• an domi maneat

means:

• whether the shepherd will lead the ox to the forum tomorrow
• or stay at home

A native English speaker often expects a direct whether ... or not, but in Latin utrum ... an is a very common way to set up a two-part choice.

They are subjunctive because they are inside an indirect question after nescio.

Latin regularly uses the subjunctive in indirect questions. So after a verb like nescio (I do not know), the thing not known is expressed with a subjunctive verb:

• ducat = present subjunctive of ducere
• maneat = present subjunctive of manere

This is different from English, where we usually keep a normal finite verb:

• I do not know whether he will lead... or stay...

Latin signals the indirect-question structure grammatically with the subjunctive.

In Latin, indirect questions normally use the subjunctive, and Latin does not have a future subjunctive for this kind of clause.

So after a present main verb like nescio, Latin often uses the present subjunctive to express action that is at the same time as or later than the main verb.

Here:

• nescio = I do not know
• ducat / maneat = whether he is to lead / will lead ... or will stay

The future sense comes from the context, especially from cras (tomorrow), not from a special future verb form.

Because nescio is the main verb of the sentence, and it is simply stating a fact:

• nescio = I do not know

The speaker is not presenting not knowing as hypothetical or dependent on anything; it is the main assertion. The subjunctive appears only in the dependent indirect question:

• utrum ... ducat an ... maneat

So the pattern is:

• main statement in the indicative
• indirect question in the subjunctive

Pastor is nominative singular, so it is the subject of both ducat and maneat.

You can tell from its form and from the sentence structure:

• pastor = the shepherd → nominative subject
• bovem = accusative object
• ducat and maneat are third-person singular verbs, matching pastor

Latin often omits repeating the subject when the same subject applies to both verbs. So pastor is understood with both:

• whether the shepherd leads...
• or stays...

Because bovem is the direct object of ducat.

The verb ducere means to lead, and the thing being led takes the accusative:

• pastor bovem ducat = the shepherd leads the ox

Its dictionary form is bos, bovis. In this sentence:

• nominative singular: bos
• accusative singular: bovem

So bovem means an ox / the ox as the object of the action.

Because ad explicitly shows motion toward a place.

• ad forum = to the forum

With verbs of motion, Latin often uses ad + accusative to mean movement to or toward a destination.

So:

• bovem ad forum ducat = lead the ox to the forum

A learner may wonder whether plain forum could work. In some expressions Latin can use the accusative of place to which without a preposition, but that is mostly with certain kinds of place names, especially towns and small islands. Forum here is a common noun, so ad forum is the normal expression.

Because domi means at home, while domo usually means from home.

This is an important Latin distinction:

• domi = at home
• domum = homeward / to home
• domo = from home

In the sentence:

• an domi maneat = or whether he stays at home

So domi is correct because the idea is location, not motion away from home.

Grammatically, it is placed with the first clause, but in sense it very naturally applies to the whole choice:

• whether tomorrow the shepherd leads the ox to the forum
• or stays at home

In other words, the choice is about what he will do tomorrow. Latin often places a time word once even when it logically belongs to both alternatives.

So a learner should usually understand:

• cras modifies the whole indirect question, unless context suggests otherwise.

Here an means or in the specific pattern utrum ... an.

It is not the same as the ordinary coordinating words aut or vel used for simple alternatives. Instead, an is commonly used in questions, especially after utrum, to introduce the second option.

So:

• utrum ... an ... = whether ... or ...

This is the standard structure for a two-way indirect question.

Latin normally avoids unnecessary repetition.

Once utrum has introduced the first alternative and pastor has been given as the subject, Latin can simply add the second option with an:

• utrum pastor ... ducat an domi maneat

The subject pastor is understood with maneat as well. English often repeats more words, but Latin is comfortable leaving them implied when the meaning is clear.

Not in standard classical prose for this kind of indirect question.

English uses if and whether in somewhat overlapping ways, but Latin usually marks indirect questions with words like:

• utrum
• num
• an
• interrogative words such as quis, quid, ubi, cur

Here, because there is an explicit choice between two alternatives, utrum ... an is especially appropriate.

So a Latin learner should think:

• English whether ... or
• Latin utrum ... an

They come from these dictionary forms:

• ducat ← duco, ducere, duxi, ductum = lead
• maneat ← maneo, manere, mansi, mansum = remain, stay

Their forms here are:

• ducat = third person singular present subjunctive active
• maneat = third person singular present subjunctive active

So both mean what he may lead / would lead and he may stay / would stay in form, but in this sentence the best English translation is simply will lead and will stay, because the subjunctive is required by the indirect-question construction.