Mater filiae narrat divitias sine parcimonia diu manere non posse.

It has two parts:

• Mater filiae narrat = the main clause: The mother tells the daughter
• divitias sine parcimonia diu manere non posse = the thing being told: that wealth cannot last long without thrift

So this is a very common Latin pattern:

• a verb of saying/thinking
• followed by an indirect statement

In Latin, that indirect statement is usually built with an accusative + infinitive construction.

Filiae can be either:

• dative singular = to/for the daughter
• genitive singular = of the daughter

Here, it is most naturally dative singular, because narrat can take the person told in the dative:

• Mater filiae narrat = The mother tells the daughter

A learner often notices that mater filiae could look like the mother of the daughter, but in this sentence the syntax strongly favors the dative: mother tells daughter ...

Because this is an indirect statement.

In Latin indirect statement, the subject of the infinitive goes into the accusative, not the nominative. So:

• direct statement: divitiae ... non possunt = wealth/riches cannot ...
• indirect statement after narrat: divitias ... non posse = that wealth/riches cannot ...

So divitias is the logical subject of manere, but grammatically it is accusative because of the indirect statement construction.

Yes. Latin divitiae is usually a plural noun, even when English uses a singular idea like wealth.

So:

• divitiae = riches, wealth
• divitias = accusative plural

This is similar to how some nouns in one language are plural while another language prefers a singular equivalent.

Because they are doing two different jobs at once:

1. posse is infinitive because the whole reported statement is in indirect statement
2. manere is infinitive because it depends on posse

So the structure is:

• divitias ... non posse = that wealth cannot
• manere = remain

Together:

• divitias ... manere non posse = that wealth cannot remain

This is normal Latin. Possum regularly takes another infinitive, just like English can is followed by a bare verb.

Because Latin usually does not use a separate word meaning that in this kind of sentence.

Instead, after verbs like say, think, know, hear, tell, Latin often uses the accusative-and-infinitive construction:

• narrat divitias ... non posse

English normally translates that with that:

• she tells her daughter that wealth cannot last ...

So the idea of that is there in the translation, but Latin expresses it through grammar rather than with a separate word.

Because sine takes the ablative.

So:

• sine parcimonia = without thrift / without frugality

This is a standard prepositional phrase. A good rule to remember is:

• sine + ablative

Parcimonia means something like:

• thrift
• frugality
• economy
• careful spending

So sine parcimonia means without thrift or without frugality.

In this sentence, the idea is that wealth does not last if it is not managed carefully.

Diu is an adverb meaning:

• for a long time
• long

Here it modifies manere:

• diu manere = to remain for a long time, to last long

So the sentence is not just saying that wealth cannot remain, but that it cannot remain long without thrift.

A direct version would be:

• Divitiae sine parcimonia diu manere non possunt.

That means:

• Wealth/Riches cannot remain long without thrift.

Then after a verb of telling, Latin changes that direct statement into indirect statement:

• divitiae → divitias
• non possunt → non posse

That is one of the most useful transformations to learn in Latin.

Because the negation belongs to the idea to be able:

• non posse = not to be able, cannot

So:

• divitias diu manere non posse = that wealth cannot remain long

In practice, English translates this naturally as cannot remain, even though Latin literally has not to be able to remain.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order. This sentence could be rearranged in several ways without changing the basic meaning, because the endings show the grammatical roles.

For example, Latin keeps the meaning clear through forms like:

• mater = nominative
• filiae = dative
• divitias = accusative
• parcimonia = ablative

So the order helps with emphasis and style more than with basic grammar.

In this sentence, putting non posse at the end gives the sentence a strong finish, because the final idea is cannot.

Because in indirect statement, the tense of the infinitive is usually relative to the main verb.

Here:

• narrat is present
• manere and posse are present infinitives

That means the action in the reported statement is happening at the same time as the telling. In effect:

• The mother tells the daughter that wealth cannot remain long without thrift.

So the present infinitive here does not simply mean present time by itself; it means time contemporary with the main verb.