This is from the first like… 20 lines of Casina – not even what Plautus wrote it doesn’t seem. Hahh. I’m a terrible Latinist. @.@
Nos postquam populi rumore intelleximus
Studiose expetere uos Plautinas fabulas,
Antiquam eius edimus comoediam,
Quam uos probastis qui estis in senioribus:
Nam iuniorum qui sunt, non norunt, scio,
Verum ut cognoscant dabimus operam sedulo.
My… translation-esque thing?
After we realized through gossip of the people
that you eagerly await Plautine tales,
we published his old comedies,
which you who are of old age approve of:
On the other hand those of youth who are here, do not know, I know,
truly we will work hard so that you become familiar.
First, I’m taking the iuniorum as talking about the following qui. But I’m not sure if that’s all that correct. Any thoughts here? 
Also, mainly I have a question with the usage of scio here. What is the indirect statement of it? Because qui isn’t accusative. I was even thinking the preceding vos could be the subject of the iuniorum, but that isn’t accusative either. The following line seems to be a clause on its own and doesn’t have the infinitive needed for indirect statement.
Thanks for any and all help~
Multas gratias vostri ago ob quod et omne auxillium (that’s wrong too, probabilissme. )
Hmm, I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be.
Also, mainly I have a question with the usage of scio here. What is the indirect statement of it?
I think it’s sort of standing on its own. “I know this: truly we will work hard…”
Finally, I would translate “non norunt” as “who have not become familiar [with Plautus]”. Taken together, this seems to make perfect sense to me: “You young’uns who haven’t gotten to know Plautus yet, well, I know this: we’ll make sure to work hard to fix that!”
Who knows, it’s possible that I’m wrong here, but so far it makes sense to me…
Salve columbula
"Antiquam eius edimus comoediam" non est hoc “we published his old comedies”, sed hoc, ut opinor, “we are putting on [i.e., performing] a classic comedy of his”
My Latin teacher always said to us that nosco means to learn and when it’s in the perfect tense it’s meaning becomes “to know”. But they basically have the same meaning anyway – and using “to get to know” makes it sound a lot clearer.
I should’ve known better with “antiquam comoediam”, because it’s definitely singular. x.x
Ooh all of those help the passage make much more sense. Thanks so much for your help~! ^^
“Nōscō” can mean both “learn” and “recognize”, “be familiar with”. “Cognōscō” is, apparently, completely synonymous, by the way. I wouldn’t really say that they change meaning in the perfect tense; it’s just the translation that changes in certain contexts. After all, if you know something, at some point you “have learned” it, right?