Hic equus fortissimus est et plaustrum grave trahit.

Latin hic can be either:

• an adverb meaning here
• a demonstrative meaning this

In Hic equus fortissimus est..., hic is not an adverb. It is a demonstrative adjective describing equus. Because it agrees with equus in gender, number, and case, it means this horse.

So here hic = this, not here.

Because equus is masculine singular nominative.

The demonstrative hic, haec, hoc has to agree with the noun it modifies:

• hic = masculine singular nominative
• haec = feminine singular nominative
• hoc = neuter singular nominative

Since equus is masculine, the correct form is hic.

Fortissimus is the superlative form of fortis.

• fortis = brave, strong
• fortior = braver, stronger
• fortissimus = bravest, strongest, or sometimes simply very brave/very strong

In this sentence, fortissimus agrees with equus, so it is masculine singular nominative.

So equus fortissimus est means the horse is very brave/strong or the bravest/strongest, depending on context and the translation you were given.

They both match equus.

Equus is:

• masculine
• singular
• nominative (the subject)

Latin adjectives and demonstratives usually agree with the noun they describe in gender, number, and case. So:

• hic matches equus
• fortissimus also matches equus

That is why they are both in masculine singular nominative forms.

Est is the verb is, from esse = to be.

In this sentence:

• equus fortissimus est = the horse is very brave/strong

Latin often does use est explicitly, especially in simple textbook sentences. In some contexts, especially in poetry or more compressed style, forms of esse can be omitted, but in ordinary prose est is perfectly normal and expected.

So here it is included because the sentence is making a full statement: This horse is very strong/brave.

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

All of these can mean roughly the same thing:

• equus fortissimus est
• equus est fortissimus
• fortissimus equus est

The difference is mostly one of emphasis or style, not basic meaning.

In your sentence, fortissimus comes before est, which is a very natural Latin arrangement.

Because plaustrum is neuter.

The adjective gravis, grave must agree with plaustrum in gender, number, and case.

Here plaustrum is:

• neuter
• singular
• accusative (direct object of trahit)

The neuter singular accusative form of the adjective is grave.

So:

• grave = correct for a neuter singular noun
• gravem = would be masculine or feminine accusative singular, so it would not match plaustrum

You know this from both the verb and the case.

• trahit means he/she/it pulls, draws
• A verb like trahit normally takes a direct object
• plaustrum is in the accusative singular

So plaustrum is the thing being pulled.

One detail that can confuse learners: neuter nouns often have the same form in the nominative and accusative singular. So plaustrum could look like either one in isolation. But in this sentence, because the horse is clearly the subject and trahit needs an object, plaustrum is understood as accusative.

Trahit is:

• 3rd person singular
• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood

It comes from trahere, meaning to pull, drag, or draw.

So trahit means he pulls, she pulls, or it pulls.
Here the subject is equus, so it means the horse pulls.

Latin does not have articles like English the and a/an.

So a noun like equus can mean:

• horse
• a horse
• the horse

And plaustrum can mean:

• cart
• a cart
• the cart

English has to choose an article when translating, but Latin usually leaves that to context.

It is joining two predicates about the same subject.

The sentence is basically:

• Hic equus fortissimus est
• et
• (hic equus) plaustrum grave trahit

The second hic equus is not repeated because Latin, like English, does not need to repeat the subject when it is already clear.

So et connects two statements about the same horse:

• is very strong/brave
• pulls a heavy cart