Mater filium redeuntem amplectitur et frontem eius osculatur.

Because Latin often leaves out subject pronouns when the verb ending already shows the person and number.

Here, both amplectitur and osculatur are third-person singular, so Latin does not need to say ea for she. The noun mater already tells you who the subject is.

Yes. Mater is the subject of both amplectitur and osculatur.

Latin does not need to repeat the subject if it stays the same. So the structure is:

• Mater ... amplectitur = the mother embraces ...
• et ... osculatur = and she kisses ...

Latin often omits possessive words when the relationship is obvious from context, especially with family members.

So mater filium naturally suggests a mother and her son. If Latin wanted to stress her own son, it could say filium suum, but that would add emphasis that is not always needed.

Because filium is the direct object of amplectitur.

The mother is doing the embracing, and the son is the one being embraced. In Latin, the direct object of a transitive verb is usually in the accusative case.

• filius = son, as subject
• filium = son, as direct object

Redeuntem is a present active participle from redeo, meaning returning or coming back.

A participle is a verbal adjective, so it behaves like an adjective and agrees with the noun it describes. Here it agrees with filium:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

So filium redeuntem means the son returning or the son who is returning.

It describes filium, not mater, because its form matches filium.

It means returning / coming back, not having returned.

Because it is a present participle, it shows an action happening at the same time as the main verb. So the idea is that the mother embraces him as he is returning.

English might translate it in different natural ways, such as:

• her returning son
• the son who is coming back
• her son as he returns

They look passive, but here they are not passive in meaning. They are deponent verbs.

A deponent verb uses passive-looking forms but has an active meaning.

So:

• amplectitur = embraces
• osculatur = kisses

not:

• is embraced
• is kissed

This is a very common thing in Latin, and both of these verbs are standard examples.

Because frontem is the direct object of the second verb, osculatur.

So the sentence has two different verbs, each with its own object:

• amplectitur → filium
• osculatur → frontem

That is why both filium and frontem are accusative.

Because suus, sua, suum refers back to the subject of the clause.

The subject here is mater. So:

• frontem suam would mean her own forehead — the mother’s forehead
• frontem eius means his forehead — the son’s forehead

Since the forehead belongs to filium, not to mater, Latin uses eius.

This is one of the most important differences between Latin and English possessives.

Eius is the genitive singular of is, ea, id, and it means his, her, or its, depending on context.

Here it means his, because the most natural referent is filium, the son.

A useful point: eius does not change to match frontem. It stays eius because it is showing possession, not acting like a regular adjective such as bonus or magnus.

Latin word order is fairly flexible because the endings show the grammatical roles.

This order is natural and clear:

• Mater first
• filium redeuntem kept together
• then the verbs and the second object

But Latin could rearrange the words for emphasis, for example:

• Mater amplectitur filium redeuntem et frontem eius osculatur

That would still mean basically the same thing.

Even so, Latin usually keeps closely related words near each other, so filium redeuntem and frontem eius are nicely grouped in the original sentence.