Si signifer signum non recte feret, cohors ordinem facile amittet.

This sentence is a straightforward future condition:

• Si ... feret = If ... will carry / if ... carries
• ... amittet = ... will lose

In Latin, an open condition about the future can use the future indicative in both clauses. English usually prefers If the standard-bearer does not carry the standard correctly, the cohort will lose formation, with a present tense in the if-clause, but Latin is perfectly happy with future + future here.

So the structure is:

• Si signifer signum non recte feret = if the standard-bearer does not carry the standard properly
• cohors ordinem facile amittet = the cohort will easily lose formation

Feret is the 3rd person singular future active indicative of fero, meaning carry, bear, or bring.

Its principal parts are:

• fero
• ferre
• tuli
• latum

So:

• signifer ... feret = the standard-bearer will carry

This verb is worth noticing because fero is irregular, so learners often do not recognize forms like feret immediately.

Because signifer is in the nominative singular, which is the normal case for the subject.

Here is the breakdown:

• signifer = subject of feret
• signum = direct object of feret

So the first clause means:

• the standard-bearer = the one doing the carrying
• the standard = the thing being carried

Even though the words look similar, their grammatical roles are different.

They are related in meaning, but they are not the same word.

• signum means sign, signal, or in a military context standard
• signifer literally means standard-bearer

The word signifer is built from:

• signum = standard
• -fer from ferre = to carry

So signifer literally means one who carries the standard.

This is a very common type of Latin compound.

Because ordinem is the accusative singular of ordo, ordinis, and it is the direct object of amittet.

• ordo = nominative singular
• ordinem = accusative singular

Since amittere means to lose, the thing being lost goes into the accusative:

• cohors ordinem amittet = the cohort will lose formation/order

So ordinem is exactly the case you would expect after a transitive verb like amittet.

Literally, it means to lose order. In this military context, a more natural English meaning is:

• to lose formation
• to fall out of order
• to lose its ranks/orderliness

So this is not just abstract order in a vague sense. It likely refers to the orderly arrangement of the soldiers.

It is singular.

Even though cohors ends in -s, it is a 3rd-declension nominative singular noun meaning cohort. Here it is the subject of amittet:

• cohors ... amittet = the cohort will lose

A learner might expect a singular noun to look more like a 1st- or 2nd-declension nominative, but 3rd-declension nouns often have quite different endings.

They are both adverbs.

• recte modifies feret
• facile modifies amittet

So:

• non recte feret = will not carry correctly / properly
• facile amittet = will easily lose

A useful way to see the structure is:

• signifer signum non recte feret
• cohors ordinem facile amittet

Each adverb sits close to the verb it modifies.

Latin often expresses this idea with non + adverb:

• recte = correctly
• non recte = not correctly

That is a very normal Latin way to say incorrectly or improperly in context. Latin can sometimes use a separate opposite adverb, but non recte is simple and idiomatic.

Because Latin has no articles.

So:

• signifer can mean the standard-bearer or a standard-bearer
• signum can mean the standard or a standard
• cohors can mean the cohort or a cohort

You decide from the context which English article fits best. In a sentence like this, the is usually the most natural translation.

The word order is natural, but Latin word order is more flexible than English word order.

This sentence has a fairly orderly pattern:

• Si signifer signum non recte feret
• cohors ordinem facile amittet

You can see a tendency toward putting the verb near the end of each clause, which is very common in Latin prose.

The grammar is shown mainly by the endings, not by word order:

• signifer = subject
• signum = object
• cohors = subject
• ordinem = object

So even if some words moved around, the basic meaning would remain the same.

It is an open condition about the future.

The speaker is not saying:

• that it definitely will happen, or
• that it is contrary to fact

Instead, the idea is:

• If this happens, that will happen

So the sentence presents a real possibility and its likely consequence. It is a practical, matter-of-fact military statement.