Mater rogat num servus innocens sit; iudex respondet eum mox liberandum esse, si verum dixerit.

It has two main clauses, each with its own dependent clause:

• Mater rogat = The mother asks
  • num servus innocens sit = an indirect yes/no question: whether the slave is innocent
• iudex respondet = the judge replies
  • eum mox liberandum esse = an indirect statement: that he is to be freed soon / should soon be set free
  • si verum dixerit = a conditional clause: if he tells / has told the truth

So Latin is combining several clause types in one sentence:

• indirect question
• indirect statement
• condition

Because Latin has no articles.

So:

• mater can mean mother, a mother, or the mother
• servus can mean slave, a slave, or the slave
• iudex can mean judge, a judge, or the judge

The context tells you which English article makes sense.

Num introduces a yes/no question, especially in indirect speech here after rogat.

So:

• rogat num servus innocens sit = she asks whether the slave is innocent

A learner may know that in a direct question num often suggests the answer no is expected. That nuance can still hover in the background, but in indirect questions it is often simply translated as whether.

Because num servus innocens sit is an indirect question, and in Latin indirect questions normally take the subjunctive.

So:

• direct question: Servusne innocens est? = Is the slave innocent?
• indirect question: Mater rogat num servus innocens sit. = The mother asks whether the slave is innocent.

The present subjunctive sit is also what you expect after the present-tense main verb rogat.

Innocens is a predicate adjective with sit.

So servus innocens sit means:

• the slave is innocent
• literally, the slave may be innocent / be innocent in the dependent clause

It agrees with servus in number and gender.
This is not an innocent slave in the simple attributive sense; it is part of the statement the slave is innocent.

Because Latin usually expresses reported statements after verbs like say, think, know, reply, and similar verbs with an accusative + infinitive construction, often called indirect statement.

So instead of something like English the judge replies that..., Latin says:

• iudex respondet eum ... esse

Literally this is something like:

• the judge replies him ... to be

But in good English we translate it as:

• the judge replies that he...

Eum refers back to servus.

It is in the accusative because in an indirect statement, the subject of the infinitive is put in the accusative.

So:

• servus = subject of the first clause’s dependent question
• eum = subject of esse in the second clause’s indirect statement

English says that he...
Latin says eum ... esse.

This is the gerundive of libero plus esse:

• liberandum = to be freed / needing to be freed
• esse = to be

Together, liberandum esse is a passive periphrastic infinitive.

In context, it means something like:

• to be set free
• to have to be set free
• to be due to be set free

So eum mox liberandum esse means:

• that he is to be freed soon
• or more naturally, that he should soon be freed

Also, liberandum agrees with eum:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

Here dixerit is best understood as future perfect indicative:

• si verum dixerit = if he tells / has told the truth

Latin often uses the future perfect in a future condition when one action must be completed before the next one happens.

Compare the idea in English:

• If he has told the truth, he will soon be freed.

A useful point: dixerit can look identical to the perfect subjunctive, but here the meaning of the sentence points to future perfect indicative.

Verum here is a substantive adjective: literally the true thing, which idiomatically means the truth.

So:

• verum dicere = to speak the truth

Latin can express truth in more than one way, including veritas, veritatis, but verum dicere is a very common idiom.

Because Latin word order is much freer than English word order. The endings show the grammatical relationships, so the language does not rely as heavily on position.

For example:

• Mater rogat num servus innocens sit
• iudex respondet eum mox liberandum esse

The words are arranged in a natural Latin way, not an English one.

A few things to notice:

• innocens comes after servus, which is very normal
• mox is placed before liberandum esse to emphasize the time soon
• eum comes before the infinitive phrase because it is the accusative subject of that whole reported statement

So the order may feel unusual to an English speaker, but the cases and verb forms make the structure clear.