Pater iubet omnes sedere, antequam sponsus et sponsa verba sua dicant.

Because omnes is the direct object of iubet (orders).

In this sentence, Latin uses a very common pattern:

• iubet = he orders
• omnes = everyone / all the people
• sedere = to sit

So Pater iubet omnes sedere literally means:

• The father orders everyone to sit

There is also an important grammar point here: omnes is not only the object of iubet, but also the understood subject of sedere. In English we say orders everyone to sit; Latin does the same idea with accusative + infinitive.

Because after iubere (to order), Latin commonly uses an infinitive to express the action being ordered.

So:

• iubet omnes sedere = orders everyone to sit

not

• iubet omnes sedent

That would not be the normal construction.

This is similar to English:

• He orders them to sit

where to sit is also an infinitive.

It is an accusative-and-infinitive type construction after iubere.

Breakdown:

• Pater = subject
• iubet = main verb
• omnes = accusative noun/pronoun, the person being ordered
• sedere = infinitive, the action ordered

So the structure is:

• someone orders someone else to do something

Examples of the same pattern:

• magister discipulos tacere iubet = the teacher orders the students to be quiet
• dux milites manere iubet = the leader orders the soldiers to remain

Omnes means all or everyone, depending on how naturally you translate it in English.

Since it stands by itself here, it is best understood as:

• everyone
• or all the people

Grammatically, it is the accusative plural of omnis.

A native English speaker may expect something very specific like all of them, and that is often the right sense too. Latin leaves it broad unless the context narrows it down.

Because antequam can introduce a clause with the subjunctive, especially when the action is viewed as anticipated or not yet completed at the time of the main verb.

Here the idea is:

• Father orders everyone to sit before the bridegroom and bride say their words

At the moment of the ordering, the speaking has not happened yet. Latin often uses the subjunctive in that kind of before clause.

So:

• antequam ... dicant = before ... say

This is a very common point for learners, because English does not usually mark this distinction clearly.

No. Antequam can take either the indicative or the subjunctive, depending on meaning and style.

Very broadly:

• indicative: the action is treated more as a straightforward fact
• subjunctive: the action is viewed as anticipated, intended, or still pending relative to the main action

In this sentence, dicant is subjunctive because the speaking is still in the future from the point of view of iubet.

So a learner should not think antequam = always subjunctive. It depends on context.

Because sponsus et sponsa is a compound subject:

• sponsus = the bridegroom
• et = and
• sponsa = the bride

Together they make two people, so the verb is plural:

• dicant = they may say / say

This matches English:

• the bridegroom and bride say

not

• the bridegroom and bride says

Literally, verba sua means their own words.

In context, this probably means something like:

• their words
• their vows
• the words they are supposed to say

The key grammar point is sua.

• suus, sua, suum is a reflexive possessive adjective
• it refers back to the subject of its own clause

In antequam sponsus et sponsa verba sua dicant, the subject of that clause is sponsus et sponsa, so sua means:

• their own

not the father’s words, and not everyone else’s words.

Because sua refers back to the subject of its own clause, while eorum/earum would refer to someone else.

Here the clause is:

• sponsus et sponsa verba sua dicant

The subject is sponsus et sponsa, so if the words belong to them, Latin uses sua.

If you said verba eorum, that would normally suggest:

• the words of those other people
• not the bride and bridegroom’s own words

That reflexive/non-reflexive distinction is something English usually does not show so clearly.

Because Latin word order is flexible, and the first word often gets some emphasis or simply sets the topic.

So Pater iubet... naturally begins with the father as the person taking action.

Latin could rearrange the words in other ways without changing the core meaning very much, for example:

• Omnes pater sedere iubet...
• Antequam sponsus et sponsa verba sua dicant, pater omnes sedere iubet

But the given order is straightforward and natural: first the main actor, then the command, then the time clause.

Yes. Verba is the plural of verbum, meaning word.

So:

• verba = words

But in some contexts, especially ceremonial ones like a wedding, words may imply something more specific, such as:

• the formal words
• the wedding vows
• the set phrases to be spoken

So the literal meaning is words, but the contextual meaning may be more specialized.

Normally with iubere, Latin prefers the accusative + infinitive construction:

• iubet omnes sedere

A learner may expect something like orders that everyone sit, but Latin usually does not use ut with iubere in the standard classical pattern.

By contrast, some other verbs of commanding often do use ut clauses, for example:

• imperat ut sedeant = he orders that they sit

So this sentence is a good example of an important difference between Latin verbs that all translate roughly as order/command in English, but do not take exactly the same construction.

Iubet is present tense, third person singular:

• he orders

The sentence is describing the action as happening in the present or as part of a vivid narration.

Likewise:

• dicant is present subjunctive
• sedere is a present infinitive

A native English speaker may wonder whether the whole sentence has to be translated with English present tense. Usually yes, unless the wider context suggests a different style of translation.