Pater dicit ventum saevum fenestram paene fregisse.

Because after dicit Latin is using an indirect statement construction, often called accusative + infinitive.

So instead of saying:

• Pater dicit quod ventus... = “Father says that the wind...”

Classical Latin more often says:

• Pater dicit ventum... fregisse

In this construction:

• the subject of the reported statement goes into the accusative
• the verb of the reported statement becomes an infinitive

So ventum is not the direct object of dicit in the ordinary sense. It is the subject of fregisse inside the indirect statement.

Because saevum is an adjective describing ventum, and adjectives must agree with the nouns they modify in:

• gender
• number
• case

Here:

• ventum = accusative singular masculine
• saevum = accusative singular masculine

So ventum saevum means the fierce/savage wind.

Fregisse is the perfect active infinitive of frangō, frangere, frēgī, frāctum, meaning to break.

So:

• frangere = to break
• fregisse = to have broken

In indirect statement, the infinitive often shows time relative to the main verb:

• present infinitive = action happening at the same time
• perfect infinitive = action earlier than the main verb
• future infinitive = action later than the main verb

So dicit ... fregisse means:

• he says that ... broke
• literally, he says ... to have broken

The breaking happened before the saying.

Fenestram is the direct object of fregisse: it is the thing being broken.

You can tell it is not the subject because:

1. In this construction, the subject of the infinitive is already ventum
2. fenestram is the thing receiving the action
3. Semantically, the wind breaks the window, not the other way around

So the structure is:

• ventum saevum = subject of fregisse
• fenestram = object of fregisse

Even though both are accusative, their roles are different.

Because Latin usually does not use a that-clause here. Instead, it uses the accusative-and-infinitive construction.

English says:

• Father says that the fierce wind almost broke the window.

Latin says, more literally:

• Father says the fierce wind to have almost broken the window.

That sounds unnatural in English, so we translate it with that, but Latin does not need a separate word for it in this sentence.

Paene means almost.

Here it modifies fregisse, so the idea is:

• almost broke
• not broke almost

So the sentence means that the wind came close to breaking the window, but did not quite do so.

Latin adverbs like paene are fairly flexible in position, but here it naturally goes just before fregisse.

Because pater is the subject of the main verb dicit.

So the main clause is:

• Pater dicit = Father says

Then what follows is the reported statement:

• ventum saevum fenestram paene fregisse = that the fierce wind almost broke the window

Latin has no articles like English the and a/an.

So:

• pater can mean father, the father, or sometimes a father
• ventum saevum can mean the fierce wind or a fierce wind
• fenestram can mean the window or a window

You decide from context which English article sounds right.

Because the two verbs belong to different layers of the sentence.

• dicit = the main verb, he says now
• fregisse = the reported action, which happened before the saying

So Latin is expressing:

• He says [now] that the fierce wind almost broke the window [earlier].

This is one of the key jobs of the perfect infinitive in indirect statement.

Yes. Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because case endings show grammatical relationships.

This sentence could be rearranged in several ways without changing the basic meaning, for example:

• Pater ventum saevum fenestram paene fregisse dicit.
• Ventum saevum pater dicit fenestram paene fregisse.

But the original order is perfectly natural. Latin often places the infinitive toward the end, and important words can be moved for emphasis.

In direct speech, you would not use the accusative-and-infinitive construction. You would make ventus the nominative subject and use a finite verb.

For example:

• Pater dicit: “Ventus saevus fenestram paene fregit.”

That means:

• Father says: “The fierce wind almost broke the window.”

Compare the two:

• direct: ventus saevus ... fregit
• indirect: ventum saevum ... fregisse

That contrast is very important in Latin.

Any of those can work, depending on context.

Saevus often means:

• fierce
• violent
• savage
• wild

With wind, English usually prefers something like fierce or violent rather than savage, although savage wind is understandable.

So a natural translation would often be:

• Father says that the fierce wind almost broke the window.

A helpful breakdown is:

• Pater = subject of the main verb
• dicit = main verb
• ventum saevum = subject of the infinitive, in the accusative
• fenestram = object of the infinitive
• paene = adverb, “almost”
• fregisse = perfect active infinitive

So the pattern is:

• [main subject] + [verb of saying] + [accusative subject] + [object] + [infinitive]

That is one of the most common Latin patterns after verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, hearing, and perceiving.