Magistra monet avaritiam et invidiam bonos mores perdere.

The main clause is Magistra monet = The teacher warns/advises.

After that comes an indirect statement, a very common Latin construction:

• avaritiam et invidiam = the subject of the indirect statement
• bonos mores = the object inside that indirect statement
• perdere = the infinitive verb

So the whole sentence works like:

The teacher warns [that greed and envy destroy good morals].

In Latin, that that-clause is often expressed with accusative + infinitive instead of a separate word meaning that.

Because in an indirect statement, Latin usually puts the subject in the accusative case and the verb in the infinitive.

So even though avaritia and invidia are logically the things doing the destroying, they appear as:

• avaritiam
• invidiam

not as nominatives avaritia and invidia.

This feels strange to English speakers, because in English we would say:

• greed and envy destroy...

with a normal subject.

But Latin often says, after verbs like monet, dicit, putat, scit, etc.:

• [accusative subject] + [infinitive verb]

Yes. This is the classic accusative + infinitive construction, often called the indirect statement in Latin grammar.

Here it is broken down:

• monet = says/warns/advises
• avaritiam et invidiam = accusative subject of the indirect statement
• perdere = infinitive verb
• bonos mores = object of perdere

So Latin uses:

• Magistra monet avaritiam et invidiam bonos mores perdere

where English uses:

• The teacher warns that greed and envy destroy good morals

That is a very common question, because at first glance they look like direct objects of monet.

The key is the infinitive perdere at the end. Once you see an accusative noun followed by an infinitive after a verb like monet, that strongly suggests an indirect statement.

So instead of reading:

• The teacher warns greed and envy...

you read:

• The teacher warns [greed and envy to destroy good morals]

which in smoother English becomes:

• The teacher warns that greed and envy destroy good morals

Also, the meaning helps. monere can take a direct object in some contexts, but here the infinitive perdere shows that avaritiam et invidiam belong with the infinitive clause.

Because bonos mores is the direct object of perdere.

The verb perdere means to destroy, and to destroy takes a direct object: destroy what?

Answer: bonos mores.

So:

• avaritiam et invidiam = accusative subject of the indirect statement
• bonos mores = accusative object of perdere

This means the sentence contains two different accusatives, doing two different jobs:

1. the subject accusative of the indirect statement
2. the direct object of the infinitive verb

Mores is the plural of mos, moris, which can mean custom, habit, character, or morals, depending on context.

In this sentence, bonos mores means something like:

• good morals
• good character
• good conduct

It is often plural in Latin when referring to a person's moral habits or standards. So even though English may use a singular idea like good character, Latin naturally says good morals/customs in the plural.

The adjective agrees with it:

• bonos = masculine accusative plural
• mores = masculine accusative plural

Because mores is a masculine noun.

Even though many nouns ending in -es can be hard for beginners to identify quickly, mos, moris is masculine, so in the accusative plural it becomes:

• mores

and the adjective must match it:

• bonos mores

not bonas mores.

Latin adjectives must agree with the nouns they describe in:

• gender
• number
• case

Monet is:

• 3rd person singular
• present tense
• active voice
• from moneo, monere

So it means:

• he/she warns
• he/she advises
• he/she reminds

Because the subject is magistra, it is translated here as the teacher warns or the female teacher warns.

Perdere is the present active infinitive of perdo, perdere.

It means to destroy or to ruin.

In an indirect statement, Latin normally uses the infinitive rather than a finite verb. So instead of a separate clause with destroy, Latin uses perdere.

That is why you get:

• monet ... perdere

rather than something like a normal main-clause verb form.

Because Latin usually does not need one in this construction.

English says:

• The teacher warns that greed and envy destroy good morals

Latin usually says:

• The teacher warns greed and envy to destroy good morals

—not as natural English, but grammatically that is closer to the Latin structure.

So the idea of that is built into the accusative + infinitive construction itself. Latin often leaves that unexpressed because the grammar already signals an indirect statement.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order, because case endings show the grammatical relationships.

Putting the infinitive at the end is very natural Latin style. It allows the sentence to build toward the final verb:

• Magistra monet
• avaritiam et invidiam
• bonos mores
• perdere

A Roman reader can still tell who is doing what because of the endings, not just because of position.

So the ending -am, -iam, and -os help identify the roles, while perdere ties the indirect statement together at the end.

Yes, to a large extent.

Because Latin uses case endings, several word orders would still express the same basic meaning, for example:

• Magistra monet bonos mores avaritiam et invidiam perdere
• Avaritiam et invidiam magistra monet bonos mores perdere

The exact emphasis may change, but the grammar remains recognizable.

That said, not every rearrangement sounds equally natural. Latin authors choose word order for style, emphasis, and rhythm. The given order is perfectly good and quite clear.

Because magistra is the feminine form, meaning female teacher or mistress/teacher depending on context.

So:

• magister = male teacher
• magistra = female teacher

The verb monet is the same either way, because Latin verbs do not change form to match masculine versus feminine subjects in the third person singular.

It can have a range of meanings, including:

• warns
• advises
• reminds

The exact English choice depends on context.

In this sentence, warns works well because the content is a moral lesson about the harmful effects of greed and envy. But advises or reminds may also be possible in another context.

That is normal in Latin: one verb often covers a range that English splits into several different words.