"New York is not in California."
Translation:Novum Eboracum in California non est.
I am confused about why the verb sometimes goes at the end, but sometimes in the middle. Somehow I got the idea that in Latin, the verb tends to go at the end?
Yes, the verb tends to go at the end. However, word order is much more flexible than English and the verb can be placed almost anywhere (usually for emphasis).
The only verb that is quite often seen in other positions is esse (to be), here used as est. It is quite common for some ancient Latin authors to use this more like how verbs are used in many modern Romance languages and English, somewhere in between the subject and the 'direct object'.
Why is this "in California"? For emphasis or to do with the verb? In other contexts we haven't seen "in" used in Latin when it would be in English. Eg:
"The young man lives in New York." Translation:Iuvenis Novi Eboraci habitat.
Novi Eboraci is in the locative case which is only used with cities/towns, small islands, and I think three other nouns including domus. It is used the same as in California.
We cannot use the locative case since California is not a city in this context. We can use it for New York City however.
Thank you. Does everyone accept locative for cities in general? I have heard a suggestion that it's not productive and should only be used for Rome, home, and a few other exceptional words.
Putting that aside, would this mean one would say "Iuvenis Novi Eboraci in Novum Eboracum [case?] habitat", distinguishing the city and state?