Mater respondet se palla vetere adhuc uti posse, sed soleas novas emendas esse.

Because after respondet Latin is using an indirect statement.

In an indirect statement:

• the subject is usually put in the accusative
• the verb is put in the infinitive

So se ... posse means that she can ...

Here se is reflexive and refers back to Mater. So:

• Mater respondet = Mother answers
• se ... posse = that she herself can ...

If the person in the indirect statement were someone else, Latin would use a different accusative pronoun, not se.

Again, because of indirect statement.

After verbs of saying, thinking, answering, knowing, and so on, Latin often uses:

• accusative subject
• infinitive verb

So English Mother answers that she can still use ... becomes Latin Mater respondet se ... uti posse.

If this were a direct statement, it would be something like:

• adhuc uti potest = she can still use or, if Mother herself were speaking,
• adhuc uti possum = I can still use

But after respondet, Latin switches to the infinitive posse.

Uti is the present infinitive of utor, uti, usus sum, which means to use.

This verb is deponent, which means:

• it has passive-looking forms
• but an active meaning

So even though uti looks like a passive infinitive in form, it means to use, not to be used.

That is a very common thing that learners have to get used to with Latin deponent verbs.

Because utor takes the ablative, not the accusative.

So:

• palla vetere = with an old cloak / old cloak as the thing used

Both words are ablative singular:

• palla → palla
• vetus → vetere

This is one of the special features of utor and a few similar verbs. English speakers often expect a direct object, but Latin does not use one here.

So:

• palla vetere uti = to use an old cloak

not:

• pallam veterem uti

Adhuc here means still or up to this point.

So adhuc uti posse means:

• to be able still to use
• or more naturally, to still be able to use

It suggests that the cloak is old, but it is not yet so worn out that it must be replaced.

This is another indirect statement, coordinated with the first one after sed.

The core idea is a passive periphrastic, which expresses necessity or obligation:

• emendas esse = to have to be bought / must be bought

So:

• soleas novas emendas esse = that new sandals must be bought

This is the second thing Mother is saying:

• she can still use the old cloak
• but new sandals need to be bought

Because in an indirect statement, the subject of the infinitive goes into the accusative.

The direct version would be:

• soleae novae emendae sunt = new sandals must be bought

But after respondet, it becomes an indirect statement:

• soleas novas emendas esse

Everything agrees with soleas:

• soleas = accusative plural feminine
• novas = accusative plural feminine
• emendas = accusative plural feminine

So novas and emendas both match soleas.

A direct version would be:

• soleae novae emendae sunt

That means new sandals must be bought.

Then, when reported after respondet, Latin changes it to:

• soleas novas emendas esse

So the pattern is:

• direct: soleae novae emendae sunt
• indirect: soleas novas emendas esse

This shift from nominative + finite verb to accusative + infinitive is extremely common in Latin.

Because the two halves are built from different verbal ideas.

In the first half:

• posse already includes the idea of to be able
• so se palla vetere adhuc uti posse is complete by itself

In the second half:

• emendas is a gerundive
• to make the passive periphrastic, Latin needs esse

So:

• emendas esse = to have to be bought

In other words:

• first half: infinitive of possum
• second half: gerundive + infinitive of sum

The sentence has:

• a main verb: Mater respondet
• then two indirect statements joined by sed

Structure:

• Mater respondet
  • se palla vetere adhuc uti posse
  • sed soleas novas emendas esse

So the logic is:

• Mother answers that she can still use the old cloak
• but that new sandals must be bought

This is a very typical Latin reporting structure:

• main verb of speaking
• followed by one or more accusative-and-infinitive clauses

To an English speaker, yes, but it is normal Latin.

Latin word order is more flexible because endings show how words fit together. So even though the order may feel unusual, the grammar is clear from the forms:

• se is the accusative subject of posse
• palla vetere is ablative with uti
• soleas novas emendas belong together by agreement
• esse completes emendas

Latin often places words for emphasis or rhythm rather than following a fixed English-style order.

So instead of trying to read strictly left to right as in English, it helps to identify:

• the main verb
• the infinitives
• the case endings
• which adjectives agree with which nouns