Fratrem stultitiae suae nondum pudet, sed postea sororem rogabit ut sibi ignoscat.

Because pudet is an impersonal verb. With pudet, Latin does not put the person who feels shame in the nominative. Instead:

• the person ashamed goes in the accusative
• the thing they are ashamed of goes in the genitive

So fratrem stultitiae suae pudet literally works like it shames the brother of his own foolishness, which English turns into the brother is ashamed of his own foolishness.

Because pudet normally takes the genitive of the cause or reason for the shame. Here, stultitiae tells you what the shame is about.

So:

• fratrem = the person feeling shame
• stultitiae suae = the thing causing the shame

This is a standard pattern with pudet.

suae is the reflexive possessive adjective, and it refers back to the same person involved in the clause: here, fratrem.

So stultitiae suae means of his own foolishness.

Latin uses suus, sua, suum when something belongs to or refers back to the subject or central person of the clause. Even though fratrem is accusative here, it is still the person whose foolishness is meant, so suae is the natural choice.

If Latin used eius, that would usually point to someone else’s foolishness.

Yes. Latin often leaves subject pronouns unstated because the verb ending already shows the person and number.

• rogabit = he/she will ask

From the context, the understood subject is the same person as fratrem in the first clause. So the sentence continues talking about the brother.

Because it is the direct object of rogabit.

The pattern is:

• rogare aliquem = to ask someone
• ut + subjunctive = what you ask them to do

So:

• sororem rogabit = he will ask his sister
• ut sibi ignoscat = to forgive him

Latin often omits possessive adjectives when the relationship is already clear from context, especially with:

• family members
• body parts
• obvious personal belongings

So sororem can naturally mean his sister here even without suam. English often has to make that relationship explicit, but Latin does not always need to.

After verbs of asking, urging, ordering, persuading, and similar ideas, Latin commonly uses ut + subjunctive to express the requested action.

So rogabit ut ignoscat literally means he will ask that she forgive, which English usually renders more naturally as he will ask her to forgive.

This is often called an indirect command or a substantive clause after a verb of asking.

It is subjunctive because it comes after ut with a verb of asking: rogabit ut ...

It is present subjunctive because of sequence of tenses:

• rogabit is a primary tense because it is future
• after a primary tense, Latin normally uses the present subjunctive for an action that is simultaneous with or later than the main verb

So rogabit ut ignoscat is exactly what you would expect: he will ask that she forgive.

English does not show this the same way, so we usually just say he will ask her to forgive.

It is dative because ignoscere takes the dative of the person forgiven:

• alicui ignoscere = to forgive someone

So sibi ignoscat means may/should forgive him/her/themself, depending on context.

Here, sibi is a reflexive pronoun, and in a dependent clause like this it normally refers back to the subject of the main verb, not to the understood subject of ignoscat. So the meaning is:

• he will ask his sister to forgive him

not:

• he will ask his sister to forgive herself

They create a clear time contrast:

• nondum = not yet
• postea = afterwards / later

So the sentence sets up a progression:

• first, he is not yet ashamed
• later, he will ask for forgiveness

These two adverbs help show the change over time.