Ego tamen fratri quoque confido, si verum responsum dat et nihil celat.

Yes. Latin normally does not need an explicit subject pronoun, because the verb ending already shows the person and number. In confido, the -o tells you the subject is I.

So ego is added for emphasis or contrast. It can suggest something like:

• I nevertheless trust my brother too
• As for me, however, I also trust my brother

A learner should not assume ego is required; it is marked, not neutral.

Tamen usually means nevertheless, still, or however.

It often signals contrast with something stated earlier or understood from context. So in this sentence it suggests that, despite some opposing consideration, the speaker still trusts the brother as well.

It does not mean exactly the same thing as simple and. It adds a concessive or contrasting idea.

Because confido takes the dative, not the direct object accusative.

So:

• frater = brother
• fratri = to/for the brother, dative singular

With confidere, Latin expresses trust in someone by using the dative:

• fratri confido = I trust my brother
• literally something like I place trust in/to my brother

This is very common with certain Latin verbs: English may use a direct object, but Latin may require a different case.

When confido means trust or have confidence in a person or thing, it commonly takes the dative:

• amico confido = I trust my friend
• consilio confido = I trust the plan / rely on the plan

It can also be used with other constructions in some contexts, especially in later or more varied Latin, but for a learner the key rule is:

• confido + dative

So fratri quoque confido is a very standard kind of construction.

Quoque means also or too, and unlike English too, it usually comes after the word it especially relates to.

So:

• fratri quoque confido = I trust my brother too / as well

The placement suggests that brother is the thing being added to a list or contrast. In other words, the sense is not just I also trust, but more specifically I trust my brother too.

This is a very useful habit to learn:

• quoque usually follows the word it emphasizes.

Because Latin often uses the present indicative in a straightforward, real, or general condition:

• si ... dat ... celat = if he gives ... and hides ...

This can mean:

• if he does give and hide nothing in the present situation, or
• more generally, if he gives a truthful answer and hides nothing

It is a normal simple condition, not a contrary-to-fact one.

So this is different from something like:

• if he were giving...
• if he had given...

Latin uses different tenses and moods for those.

Because responsum is a neuter singular noun here, and verum is the adjective agreeing with it.

Agreement in Latin means the adjective must match the noun in:

• gender
• number
• case

So:

• responsum = neuter singular accusative
• verum = neuter singular accusative

Together:

• verum responsum = a true answer / a truthful answer

If the noun were plural, then the adjective would also change:

• vera responsa = true answers

It is accusative singular, because it is the direct object of dat.

The verb dare means to give, and the thing given is normally put in the accusative:

• responsum dat = he gives an answer

Since verum modifies responsum, it must also be accusative singular:

• verum responsum dat = he gives a true answer

So the cases work like this:

• fratri = dative with confido
• verum responsum = accusative object of dat
• nihil = accusative object of celat

Responsum is a noun meaning answer or response.

It comes from the verb respondere (to answer), but here it is being used as an independent noun, not as a participle.

So verum responsum dat means:

• he gives a truthful answer
• he gives the true answer

Depending on context, English may translate it a little differently.

Nihil is the normal form meaning nothing. It is commonly used as a neuter pronoun-like word, and in many contexts the form stays nihil.

Here it is the object of celat:

• nihil celat = he hides nothing

For a learner, it is best to remember nihil as the standard form used for nothing, especially as a direct object.

No. The subject of dat and celat is understood as he.

The verb endings show this:

• dat = he/she/it gives
• celat = he/she/it hides

From the context, that he is most naturally the brother. So the idea is:

• I trust my brother too, if he gives a true answer and hides nothing

This is a good example of how Latin can shift subjects without stating pronouns explicitly, because the verb forms make the person clear.

Latin often leaves possessive ideas unstated when they are obvious from context.

So fratri can naturally mean:

• to the brother
• to my brother
• to his brother

The exact possessive is often supplied by context or by the already-known meaning.

If Latin wanted to make my explicit, it could say:

• fratri meo

But that is not always necessary. Latin is often less explicit than English about possessives when the reference is clear.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because Latin relies heavily on case endings and verb endings to show grammatical relationships.

So even though English prefers something like:

• I nevertheless also trust my brother, if he gives a truthful answer and hides nothing

Latin can arrange the words for emphasis:

• Ego gives emphasis to the speaker
• tamen marks contrast
• fratri quoque highlights brother too

The sentence is not random; the order helps shape emphasis. In Latin, word order often tells you what is being stressed, not just who is doing what.

The dictionary form is celo, celare (more fully cēlō, cēlāre), meaning to hide or conceal.

So:

• celat = he/she/it hides

This is not the same as caelat, from caelo, which means to engrave, carve, or emboss. Those are different verbs.

So in this sentence, nihil celat clearly means:

• he hides nothing
• he conceals nothing