Femina liberalis pauperi panem dat; vir avarus autem nummos suos celat.

In Latin, adjectives must agree with the nouns they describe in gender, number, and case, but they do not have to belong to the same declension.

So:

• femina = feminine, singular, nominative
• liberalis = feminine, singular, nominative

They agree correctly, even though:

• femina is a 1st-declension noun
• liberalis is a 3rd-declension adjective

This is very normal in Latin.

Because liberalis is a 3rd-declension adjective. Its nominative singular forms are:

• masculine: liberalis
• feminine: liberalis
• neuter: liberale

So the feminine form with femina is correctly liberalis. Not all feminine adjectives end in -a.

Pauperi is in the dative singular, because it is the indirect object of dat.

With dare meaning to give, Latin often uses:

• something in the accusative
• to someone in the dative

So here:

• panem = the thing given
• pauperi = the person receiving it

In other words, she gives bread to the poor person.

It is originally an adjective, from pauper, pauperis meaning poor, but here it is being used substantively, meaning the noun is understood rather than stated.

So pauperi means something like:

• to the poor person
• to the poor man
• to a poor person

Latin does this often. English does something similar in phrases like the rich or the poor.

Because panem is the direct object of dat. It is the thing being given.

Its dictionary form is panis meaning bread, and here it appears as panem, the accusative singular.

So the pattern is:

• femina = subject
• panem = direct object
• pauperi = indirect object
• dat = verb

This is a very common Latin pattern. Autem usually means however, but, or on the other hand, and it often comes in the second position of its clause rather than first.

So Latin prefers:

• vir avarus autem ...

rather than:

• autem vir avarus ...

This can feel strange to English speakers, but it is normal Latin word order for autem.

Suos is the reflexive possessive adjective, meaning his own here. It refers back to the subject of its own clause, which is vir avarus.

So:

• nummos suos celat = the greedy man hides his own coins

Latin uses suus, sua, suum when the possessor is the subject of the clause.

By contrast:

• eius would mean his or her referring to someone else, not the subject

Also, suos agrees with nummos, not with vir, because possessive adjectives agree with the thing possessed:

• nummos = masculine, plural, accusative
• suos = masculine, plural, accusative

Both verbs are:

• present tense
• active voice
• third person singular

So they mean:

• dat = he/she gives
• celat = he/she hides

The subject does not need to be repeated inside the verb in English style, because the ending -t already tells you the subject is he, she, or it.

Not nearly as fixed as in English. Latin uses endings to show grammatical roles, so word order is often freer.

For example, the first clause could be rearranged in several ways without changing the basic meaning:

• Femina liberalis pauperi panem dat
• Pauperi femina liberalis panem dat
• Panem femina liberalis pauperi dat

The endings still show:

• femina = subject
• panem = direct object
• pauperi = indirect object

That said, word order can still affect emphasis and style.

The semicolon separates two closely connected clauses that are being contrasted:

• the generous woman gives
• the greedy man hides

So the punctuation helps show the contrast, which is also signaled by autem. Latin authors often like this kind of balanced contrast.