Frater rogat utrum Brundisium prope Romam sit necne; pater respondet Brundisium in Italia esse, non prope Romam.

Because utrum Brundisium prope Romam sit necne is an indirect question after rogat.

In Latin, the verb in an indirect question is normally put in the subjunctive, so sit appears instead of est.

A direct question would use the indicative, for example:

Brundisiumne prope Romam est?

But once that question is reported after rogat, Latin changes it to sit.

It means whether ... or not.

So:

utrum Brundisium prope Romam sit necne
= whether Brundisium is near Rome or not

A few details:

• utrum introduces a yes/no question
• necne adds the negative alternative, or not

So this is a very standard Latin way to frame an indirect yes/no question.

Because after respondet, Latin is using an indirect statement.

With verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, hearing, and so on, Latin often uses:

• an accusative subject
• plus an infinitive verb

This is called the accusative-and-infinitive construction.

So:

pater respondet Brundisium in Italia esse
literally = the father replies Brundisium to be in Italy
natural English = the father replies that Brundisium is in Italy

Latin usually does this instead of using a separate word for that.

In Brundisium in Italia esse, it is technically accusative, because it is the subject of the infinitive esse in an indirect statement.

However, Brundisium is a neuter second-declension noun, and in that declension the nominative and accusative singular have the same form.

So:

• nominative: Brundisium
• accusative: Brundisium

That is why the form does not visibly change.

Because Latin usually does not use a conjunction like English that after a verb of saying in this kind of sentence.

English says:

The father replies that Brundisium is in Italy.

Latin instead says:

pater respondet Brundisium in Italia esse

The meaning of that is built into the accusative + infinitive structure.

Because prope is a preposition that takes the accusative case.

So:

• prope Romam = near Rome

This is just the case that prope governs. It does not mean motion toward Rome here; it is simply how that preposition works.

Because different prepositions govern different cases.

Here:

• in with location takes the ablative → in Italia = in Italy
• prope takes the accusative → prope Romam = near Rome

So the difference comes from the prepositions themselves, not from any difference in English wording.

Because Latin has no articles.

So:

• frater can mean brother, a brother, or the brother
• pater can mean father, a father, or the father

The context tells you which English wording is best.

In this sentence, English naturally uses the brother and the father.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because Latin uses endings to show grammatical relationships.

English depends heavily on position. Latin depends more on case endings and verb forms, so words can move around more freely for emphasis or style.

For example:

Brundisium in Italia esse, non prope Romam

puts non prope Romam at the end, which gives a neat contrast:

• in Italy
• not near Rome

So the order is not random; it helps emphasize the correction.

A natural direct version would be something like:

Brundisiumne prope Romam est?
= Is Brundisium near Rome?

And the direct answer:

Brundisium in Italia est, non prope Romam.
= Brundisium is in Italy, not near Rome.

When Latin reports these indirectly:

• the direct question becomes an indirect question with subjunctive: sit
• the direct statement becomes an indirect statement with infinitive: esse

That is why the sentence has both sit and esse.