Et verbum caro factum est

[Scarlatti]

I'm sure there is a simple answer to this, but why is the appositive "caro" used here, why isn't "flesh" the direct object of the sentence and thus in the accusative -- "carnem"?

[bedwere]

I'm sure there is a simple answer to this, but why is the appositive "caro" used here, why isn't "flesh" the direct object of the sentence and thus in the accusative -- "carnem"?

Because "fio" is a copulative verb like "sum", "videor", etc. and thus takes the double nominative:

Paulus bonus est
Petrus fatigatus videtur
Verbum caro fit

Besides, it is a word by word translation of the Greek: καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο

[Scarlatti]

Thank you for the quick response. I am a rank beginner, about a hundred pages through D'Ooge, and haven't encountered the double nominative yet by name. I never thought of a line like "Lesbia dea est" as being a double nominative, I just saw that as a use of the appositive, with "dea" being a description of Lesbia.

What confused me with "Et verbum caro factum est" is that the Word is MADE flesh, a change is effected, clearly "caro" does not just describe "verbum." Now it makes sense, thanks again!