Mater putat hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse, sed pretium nimium esse.

After verbs like putat (thinks), Latin usually does not use a separate word meaning that. Instead, it uses an indirect statement construction:

• hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse
• pretium nimium esse

Literally, Latin says something like:

• Mother thinks this ornament to be beautiful
• but the price to be too high

In smoother English, we translate that with that.

Because after putat, Latin puts the reported statement into the infinitive.

So:

• direct statement: Hoc ornamentum pulchrum est = This ornament is beautiful
• after putat: Mater putat hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse = Mother thinks that this ornament is beautiful

The same pattern appears in:

• direct: Pretium nimium est
• indirect: pretium nimium esse

So esse is the infinitive to be, while est is the finite verb is.

Mater is the subject of the main verb putat, so it stays in the nominative:

• Mater putat = Mother thinks

But inside an indirect statement, the subject of the infinitive goes into the accusative. So the things being thought about are treated differently from the main subject.

That is why the sentence has:

• main subject: mater
• subject of the first infinitive: hoc ornamentum
• subject of the second infinitive: pretium

Because they are neuter singular nouns, and in Latin the nominative and accusative are often identical in the neuter.

So:

• ornamentum can be nominative singular or accusative singular
• pretium can be nominative singular or accusative singular

In this sentence, they are functioning as accusatives because they are the subjects of infinitives in indirect statement.

Hoc means this, and it must agree with ornamentum.

Since ornamentum is:

• neuter
• singular
• here functioning as accusative

the demonstrative must also be neuter singular accusative. That form is hoc.

So:

• hic = masculine
• haec = feminine
• hoc = neuter

Because ornamentum is neuter, hoc is the correct form.

Because pulchrum agrees with ornamentum.

Here pulchrum is a predicate adjective in indirect statement, and it must match ornamentum in:

• gender: neuter
• number: singular
• case: accusative

So:

• pulcher = masculine nominative singular
• pulchra = feminine nominative singular
• pulchrum = neuter nominative/accusative singular

Since ornamentum is neuter singular accusative in this construction, pulchrum is exactly what we expect.

Yes. In this sentence, nimium goes with pretium and means something like too great, too high, or excessive.

Like pulchrum, it is a predicate word inside indirect statement, so it matches pretium:

• pretium = neuter singular accusative in function
• nimium = neuter singular accusative in agreement

English often translates this more naturally as the price is too high.

Because it is understood from the first part.

The full sense is:

• Mater putat hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse, sed [mater putat] pretium nimium esse.

Latin often leaves out a repeated word when it is obvious. English does this too:

• Mother thinks this ornament is beautiful, but the price is too high

We understand that thinks still applies to both parts.

They would become direct statements with finite verbs:

• Hoc ornamentum pulchrum est.
• Pretium nimium est.

Then, when Latin puts them after putat, it changes them into indirect statement:

• hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse
• pretium nimium esse

This is a very useful transformation to learn.

No. Latin word order is fairly flexible.

This sentence puts:

1. the main subject and verb first: Mater putat
2. the first indirect statement next
3. then the contrast with sed
4. then the second indirect statement

But Latin could rearrange parts for emphasis. For example, you could also see:

• Mater hoc ornamentum pulchrum esse putat, sed pretium nimium esse.

The endings, not the position alone, tell you how the words fit together.