Mercatrix sperat frumentum e Sicilia ad Ostia intra paucos dies allatum iri.

Because after sperat (she hopes), Latin often uses an indirect statement construction.

In an indirect statement:

• the subject of the embedded statement goes into the accusative
• the verb goes into the infinitive

So in:

Mercatrix sperat frumentum ... allatum iri

the words frumentum ... allatum iri mean something like:

• that the grain will be brought

Even though frumentum is the logical subject of will be brought, it appears in the accusative because it is the subject of an infinitive.

This is an accusative-and-infinitive construction, often called indirect statement.

The direct idea would be something like:

• Frumentum ... afferetur = The grain will be brought ...

After sperat, Latin changes that into indirect statement:

• sperat frumentum ... allatum iri = she hopes that the grain will be brought ...

So:

• frumentum = accusative subject of the indirect statement
• allatum iri = future passive infinitive

This is extremely common after verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, perceiving, and also often after verbs like hope.

Allatum iri is the future passive infinitive of afferre (to bring).

So it means:

• to be going to be brought
• more naturally in English: will be brought

Latin forms the future passive infinitive in a special way:

• supine in -um
  • iri

So from afferre you get:

• allatum iri = to be about to be brought / will be brought

In this sentence, it is the infinitive needed for the indirect statement after sperat.

Because afferri would mean to be brought in a more general, non-future sense, while allatum iri specifically means to be going to be brought / will be brought.

The merchant is hoping about something that has not happened yet, so Latin uses the future passive infinitive.

Compare:

• afferri = to be brought
• allatum iri = to be going to be brought / will be brought

So the future idea is important here.

Not in the normal adjective/participle sense.

This is a point that often confuses learners, because allatum looks like it might be a participle agreeing with frumentum. But here it is actually the supine used to form the future passive infinitive:

• allatum iri

So allatum is not just a standalone participle modifying frumentum. It is part of a fixed verbal form.

That said, because frumentum is neuter singular accusative, the form allatum may look as though it matches it. But grammatically, this is the supine construction for the future passive infinitive.

It comes from the irregular verb afferre (to bring to, bring), whose principal parts are:

• affero
• afferre
• attuli
• allatum

So allatum iri is built from the fourth principal part, allatum.

This is one of those verbs where the perfect system looks rather different from the present system, so it is worth memorizing the principal parts carefully.

Iri is the passive infinitive of eo (to go), and it is used in the special formation of the future passive infinitive:

• supine in -um + iri

So:

• allatum iri literally has the structure to go brought
• but idiomatically it means to be going to be brought or simply will be brought

You do not need to translate iri separately in a word-for-word way; it is just part of this standard future passive infinitive formation.

Because e/ex means out of / from, and it takes the ablative case.

So:

• e Sicilia = from Sicily

Here Sicilia is ablative singular.

Latin often uses:

• ab for from with persons or from near something
• e/ex for out of, from
• de for down from, concerning, and sometimes also from

In this sentence, e Sicilia is a very natural way to say from Sicily.

Because Ostia is the name of a town that is neuter plural in form.

So although in English we treat Ostia as a singular place-name, in Latin it is grammatically plural:

• nominative/accusative plural: Ostia
• genitive plural: Ostiorum, etc.

Since ad takes the accusative, and the accusative plural form is also Ostia, Latin says:

• ad Ostia = to Ostia

So this is not an exception to ad + accusative. It is accusative already; it just happens to look the same as the nominative.

They show two different directions:

• e Sicilia = from Sicily
• ad Ostia = to Ostia

So together they describe the route of the grain:

• from Sicily to Ostia

Latin is very precise with prepositions of motion:

• e/ex + ablative for motion out of/from
• ad + accusative for motion to/toward

Paucos dies is accusative plural, because it follows intra.

• intra = within
• intra takes the accusative

So:

• intra paucos dies = within a few days

The adjective paucos agrees with dies in case, number, and gender.

It means within a few days.

That is, the merchant hopes the grain will arrive at Ostia no later than a few days from now.

It is slightly different in nuance from simply saying for a few days or during a few days. The phrase with intra gives a time limit:

• within a few days
• before a few days have passed

Good question. Dies can be masculine or feminine in Latin, but it is usually masculine, especially in ordinary expressions of time like this.

So in:

• paucos dies

the masculine adjective paucos is perfectly normal.

The feminine use of dies is much less common and tends to appear in certain special contexts.

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

English depends heavily on position:

• The merchant hopes that the grain will be brought ...

Latin can move words around more freely:

• Mercatrix sperat frumentum e Sicilia ad Ostia intra paucos dies allatum iri.

A few things to notice:

• Mercatrix comes first as the topic or subject.
• sperat comes early, introducing the indirect statement.
• frumentum begins the indirect statement.
• allatum iri comes at the end, where Latin often places the verb.

This final position for the infinitive phrase gives the sentence a neat Latin shape.

Yes. Mercatrix is the feminine form meaning female merchant / woman trader.

Compare:

• mercator = merchant (masculine)
• mercatrix = merchant (feminine)

So the sentence specifically tells us that the merchant is a woman.

Because Latin usually does not use a separate word equivalent to English that in indirect statement.

English says:

• The merchant hopes that the grain will be brought ...

Latin simply uses:

• sperat frumentum ... allatum iri

The idea of that is built into the accusative-and-infinitive construction itself.

So when reading Latin, you often mentally supply that in English, even though no single Latin word is present.

Not in standard classical prose after sperat, if the writer wants ordinary indirect statement.

A direct statement would use a finite verb, for example:

• Frumentum e Sicilia ad Ostia intra paucos dies afferetur.
  • The grain will be brought from Sicily to Ostia within a few days.

But once that thought is put after sperat, classical Latin normally changes it into indirect statement:

• Mercatrix sperat frumentum ... allatum iri.

So the infinitive is not optional here; it is the normal syntax for this kind of clause.

A smooth way is:

• The merchant hopes that the grain will be brought from Sicily to Ostia within a few days.

Even though the Latin literally uses an infinitive, natural English usually prefers:

• hopes that ... will be brought

So when reading Latin, it is often best to recognize the structure grammatically, but translate it idiomatically.

Usually frumentum means grain or corn in the broad ancient sense of cereal crop, and sometimes more specifically wheat, depending on context.

In this sentence, grain is a safe general translation unless the wider context clearly points to wheat in particular.

So a learner should not assume it must always mean exactly one modern crop.

This sentence is a very useful review of several important topics:

1. Indirect statement

   • sperat frumentum ... allatum iri

2. Accusative subject of the infinitive

   • frumentum

3. Future passive infinitive

   • allatum iri

4. Prepositions with their cases

   • e Sicilia = e + ablative
   • ad Ostia = ad + accusative
   • intra paucos dies = intra + accusative

5. Irregular principal parts

   • afferre, attuli, allatum

6. A plural place-name

   • Ostia

So even though the sentence is short, it packs in a lot of standard Latin grammar.