Vulgate Latin syntax

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.
Post Reply
Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Vulgate Latin syntax

Post by Interaxus »

I'm puzzled. Are the two following sentences merely ‘quaint and clumsy Latin’ or can someone explain to me the inner logic of Biblical Latin syntax?

John 1.7:

hic venit in testimonium / ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine / ut omnes crederent per illum.

(OK. This man came for a witness [‘as a witness’? – is ‘testimonium’ a person (a witness) or is it ‘testimony’ as in the next part of the sentence? – and how does ‘in’ function here?] / to give testimony of [regarding] the light / that all men might believe through him)

John 1.8:

non erat ille lux / sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine. /

(he was not the light / but in order – as a witness?? – that he might present testimony concerning the light...)

This last sentence seems quite chaotic... 'He was not ... but that he might present ...' ??? / as testimony/witness that he might ...??? I don’t get it. :(

Of course, I get the underlying esthetic/rhetorical structure, but how does that crazy syntax work?

Cheers,
Int

User avatar
thesaurus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1012
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:44 pm

Re: Vulgate Latin syntax

Post by thesaurus »

I think the logic works. It might just work a little differently than you're used to in classical Latin (or maybe this is fine in classical, I'm not sure).
John 1.7:

hic venit in testimonium / ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine / ut omnes crederent per illum.
I think "venire in testimonium" might just be a phrase that means "to come in testimony," generally "to come as evidence/proof." So He presented himself as proof [of God's glory, etc.] so that everyone..."
John 1.8:

non erat ille lux / sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine. /
Here I don't think testimonium is the trouble, but an assumed word. Perhaps "Non erat ille lux, sed [erat] ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine." He was/existed so that he could give proof. Erat, vivebat, existebat... It's uncommon to see a result "ut" clause with a verb of "esse" in the independent clause, but that's theology I guess.

Does this help at all, or am I off track?
Horae quidem cedunt et dies et menses et anni, nec praeteritum tempus umquam revertitur nec quid sequatur sciri potest. Quod cuique temporis ad vivendum datur, eo debet esse contentus. --Cicero, De Senectute

Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Vulgate Latin syntax

Post by Interaxus »

Thesaurus:

Thank you so much! Now I see it.

In this case, you are the one who brought the light. :D

Cheers,
Int

User avatar
paulusnb
Textkit Fan
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: Vulgate Latin syntax

Post by paulusnb »

Interaxus. It might also help to know that Church Latin uses more prepositions. Inflection was replaced, to a degree, by the prepositions.
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. ~Swift

Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Re: Vulgate Latin syntax

Post by Junya »

Hi.

John 1.7:

hic venit in testimonium / ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine / ut omnes crederent per illum.


"testimonium" in "in testimonium" is accusative. So I guess this preposition "in" means "to the direction of" or "for the purpose of". There is an aim, goal, purpose (=testimonium) and "he came" to that direction.

Post Reply