Auriga ungulam equae diligenter spectat, antequam currus moveatur.

Auriga is nominative singular, so it is the subject of spectat.

The ending -a does not automatically mean a noun is feminine in meaning. Auriga belongs to the first declension, which often has feminine nouns, but some first-declension nouns referring to people can be masculine or common-gender in sense. So auriga means charioteer even though it looks like a typical first-declension noun.

Ungulam is accusative singular.

It is in the accusative because it is the direct object of spectat: the charioteer is looking at / examining the hoof.

The basic pattern is:

• auriga = subject
• ungulam = direct object
• spectat = verb

Here equae is best understood as genitive singular: of the mare.

So ungulam equae means the mare’s hoof or the hoof of the mare.

It is true that equae could also be dative singular in form, but the context makes the genitive much more natural. Latin often uses the genitive to show possession or close relationship between two nouns, and that is exactly what is happening here.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order.

Both ungulam equae and equae ungulam could be understood, because the case endings show the grammatical relationships. In this sentence, ungulam equae keeps the noun hoof first and then adds of the mare after it, which is a very natural Latin way to phrase it.

So the order is flexible, but the endings are what really matter.

Diligenter modifies spectat.

It is an adverb meaning carefully, attentively, or with care. It tells us how the charioteer examines the hoof.

So:

• spectat = he looks at / examines
• diligenter spectat = he carefully examines

Spectat comes from spectare, which usually means to look at, to observe, or to examine, not just to see by chance.

That makes it a good choice here, because the idea is not merely that the charioteer notices the hoof, but that he deliberately inspects it.

So spectat suggests active attention, not passive sight.

Antequam means before and introduces a subordinate clause.

It sets up the relationship between the two actions:

• main action: the charioteer examines the hoof
• later action: the chariot is moved

So antequam currus moveatur means before the chariot is moved.

Moveatur is present subjunctive passive.

After antequam and priusquam, Latin often uses the subjunctive when the action in that clause is still anticipated, not yet completed, or viewed as something still in prospect at the time of the main verb.

That is what we have here: the hoof is examined before the moving happens. The moving has not happened yet from the viewpoint of spectat.

So the subjunctive helps express that sense of a still-future or pending action.

It is passive because currus is the thing being moved.

• active: someone moves the chariot
• passive: the chariot is moved

Latin does not name who moves it, so the passive is a neat way to focus on the chariot itself.

Thus currus moveatur means the chariot is moved or more literally the chariot be moved in form, though in this sentence the natural English translation is is moved.

Here currus is nominative singular, the subject of moveatur.

That can be a little tricky, because currus is a fourth-declension noun, and the form currus can also look like other forms in other contexts. But the verb moveatur is singular, so here currus must be singular too.

In this clause:

• currus = subject
• moveatur = is moved

The present subjunctive fits well because the main verb spectat is present, and the moving is seen as an action that is still to happen relative to that present-time viewpoint.

Latin often uses the present subjunctive in this kind of clause after a primary tense when the action is pending.

So the tense is not simply about clock time; it also reflects how the action is viewed in relation to the main verb.

Yes, the sentence as written refers to one hoof: ungulam is singular.

Latin is being specific. If the writer wanted to say that the charioteer examines the hooves, the accusative plural ungulas would be expected.

So the singular is meaningful: the sentence focuses on a particular hoof.

Yes. It is perfectly natural Latin.

The main clause is arranged as:

• Auriga = subject
• ungulam equae = object phrase
• diligenter = adverb
• spectat = verb

Then the subordinate clause follows:

• antequam currus moveatur

Latin often places the finite verb later than English would, and it allows modifiers and dependent nouns to move around more freely. What keeps the sentence clear is not strict word order, but the endings of the words.