Ancilla spongia mensam tergit, quia guttae aquae in ea manent.

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

• ancilla can mean the slave-girl or a slave-girl
• spongia can mean with a sponge or with the sponge
• mensam can mean the table or a table

You work out which is meant from the context.

Ancilla is in the nominative singular, which is the case normally used for the subject of the sentence.

So ancilla means the slave-girl as the person doing the action.

The verb tergit is also third person singular, so it matches a singular subject like ancilla: the slave-girl wipes.

Because mensam is in the accusative singular, not the nominative.

The accusative case is commonly used for the direct object: the thing directly affected by the action.

So:

• ancilla = subject, the slave-girl
• mensam = direct object, the table

In other words, the slave-girl is wiping the table.

Here spongia is in the ablative singular, and the ablative can be used to show means or instrument—the thing by which an action is done.

So spongia means:

• with a sponge
• by means of a sponge

This is often called the ablative of means or ablative of instrument.

Because Latin often uses the ablative by itself to express means or instrument.

English usually says with a sponge, but Latin can simply say spongia.

So:

• English: The slave-girl wipes the table with a sponge
• Latin: Ancilla spongia mensam tergit

No extra word is needed.

Tergit is:

• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood
• third person singular

It comes from the verb tergere, meaning to wipe or to clean off.

So tergit means she wipes, he wipes, or it wipes.
Here, because the subject is ancilla, it means she wipes.

Quia means because and introduces a clause giving the reason.

So the sentence has two parts:

1. Ancilla spongia mensam tergit = The slave-girl wipes the table with a sponge
2. quia guttae aquae in ea manent = because drops of water remain on it

So quia connects the main action with the reason for it.

In guttae aquae:

• guttae is nominative plural = drops
• aquae is genitive singular = of water

So together they mean drops of water.

This is a very common Latin pattern:

• noun + genitive
• guttae aquae = drops of water
• literally: water-drops or drops of water

Also, guttae is the subject of manent, because it is nominative plural.

Manent is:

• present tense
• active voice
• indicative mood
• third person plural

It comes from manere, meaning to remain or to stay.

Because guttae is plural, the verb is plural too:

• guttae ... manent = the drops remain

Because in takes different cases depending on the meaning:

• in + ablative = in/on a place, with no motion
• in + accusative = into/onto a place, with motion toward it

Here the drops are already there; they are remaining there, not moving onto it. So Latin uses the ablative:

• in ea = on it / in it

If the sentence were about movement onto something, you would expect in eam instead.

Ea is a feminine singular form of the pronoun meaning her, it, or that depending on context. Here it means it.

It agrees in gender and number with the thing referred to. In this sentence, the natural meaning is that ea refers to mensam (the table), so:

• in ea = on it, that is, on the table

That fits the sense: the slave-girl wipes the table because drops of water remain on it.

Yes, grammatically it could, because both mensa and spongia are feminine singular nouns.

But in this sentence, context strongly suggests that ea refers to mensam:

• she is wiping the table
• the reason is that drops of water remain on it

So the meaning points to the table, even though the pronoun form itself could match either noun.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because the endings show the grammatical roles.

English relies heavily on position:

• The slave-girl wipes the table

Latin can move words around more freely because:

• ancilla shows the subject
• mensam shows the object
• spongia shows the instrument

So Ancilla spongia mensam tergit is perfectly normal Latin, even though it does not copy English word order exactly.

Yes. In Latin, in + ablative can mean in or on, depending on the noun and the context.

With something like a table, English often prefers on:

• in mensa or in ea can be understood as on the table / on it

So the Latin preposition is broader than a single English translation word.