"Rome is in Italy."
Translation:Roma est in Italia.
I disagree. Latin is a Subject-Object-Verb language. The given order is not normal.
Although verbs usually go at the end, but forms of sum (sum, es, est, sumus, estis, sunt, eram, eras, erat, eramus, eratis, erant, ero, eris, erit, erimus, eritis, erunt, fui, fuisti, fuit, fuimus, fuistis, fuerunt, fueram, fueras, fuerat, fueramus, fueratis, fuerant, fuero, fueris, fuerit, fuerimus, fueritis, fuerint, and all of the passive forms) can go multiple places in the sentence.
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres. All Gaul is divided into three parts.
You should tell Caesar that ;)
SOV is common, but so it SVO in Latin.
Something cannot be more correct. Both forms are correct and common. SOV order is more common in general, but SVO is actually more common with esse.
Latin is a highly inflected language, therefore the function of the word is almost entirely dependent on ❤❤❤ the word is declined/conjugated. Roma in Italia est is correct
the translation of "roma in italia est" is rome is in italia the traslation of "roma est in italia" is "roma in italia" or not?
Roma in Italia est it's the correct answer because the rule in latin gramar is that the verd is the last word in the sentence
There isn't just one correct answer. There is no rule in Latin for where the verb should go. Often it's SOV, but SVO, VOS, and VSO are also seen.
SOV is only slightly more common than SVO. No one order makes up more than 50% of Latin, so you can say which one is normally used.
I mean, sure. They CAN go anywhere. But they don't normally.
"sum" (and other copulae) is an exception, but otherwise deviating from SOV creates emphases that would be akin, at their most extreme, to saying in English:
The dog a man bites.
Much to learn you have.
We get the meaning, but there's an intentional, artistic effect at play, and erasing that fact means that people are going to have a harder time understanding nuance when they actually want to read real Latin.