I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the Latin translations are mostly done in a word-for-word manner and would receive several red crosses at the hands of any self-respecting Latin schoolteacher. To take two examples:
in via sumus = lit. "on the way, we are"
= "we are physically located on a path"
Quod exspectas? = lit. "which are you waiting for?"
= "[there is a thing] that you are waiting for?"
The first phrase attempts to translate one language's idiom (a figurative use of language) into another's literal equivalent. The author has consulted a dictionary, discovered the Latin word for "way," the correct form of the verb "to be" and plugged the words together.
The second phrase fails to distinguish between the uses of the relative pronoun/interrogative adjective '
qui/quae/quod' and the interrogative pronoun '
quis/quid.' In brief, '
quod' can be used either to introduce a relative clause ("there is a plan
that I'm concocting") or, when attached to a noun, as an interrogative adjective "
what plan are you concocting?"). It cannot serve as an interrogative pronoun ("
what are you concocting?").
For single words or basic phrases, the Latin is fine (e.g.
eamus = "let's go").
My guess is that the same dictionary technique underpins the other ancient languages.
