Textkit Logo

A vulgar creation

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.

A vulgar creation

Postby Merus Ipse » Sat May 31, 2008 7:21 pm

Hello all,

This is my first post here. I am at the end of my first year of Latin (Wheelock).

I am translating the first few paragraphs of Genesis from the Vulgate and have a couple of questions. I am familiar enough with the Bible that the translation is disappointingly easy- I feel like I am cheating!

However I have run into a problem interpreting exactly what Jerome meant in the latter half of the sentence:

Vocavitque Deus firmamentum caelum: et factum est vespere et mane dies secundus

1. why are vespere and mane in the ablative? Is this ablative of time, or of means/instrument?

2. Why is factum singular, shouldn't it be "facta sunt" (bc. of vespere AND mane)

Thank you
Merus Ipse
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 6:07 pm

Postby bedwere » Sat May 31, 2008 9:27 pm

I'm not an expert, but that has never stopped me so far from saying my opinion

I think St. Jerome was translating literally from the Hebrew and using Semitic expressions that are not part of Ciceronian Latin.
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 2683
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California

Postby adrianus » Sat May 31, 2008 11:33 pm

Hi, Merus Ipse. Welcome! Salvus sis, Mere Ipse. Gratus est nobis tuus adventus!
I'm not an expert either but... Necnon peritus sum, atqui...
Vespere et mane, dies secundus factus est-- "With an evening and a morning, the second day [singular, numeri singulis] was made".
Ablative of means for a manner or circumstance of doing, I believe. Ablativus modi, ut opinor.
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:23 am

Textkit Fan
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby adrianus » Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:35 pm

Oops. Timeodaneos is right. I misread "factus est" for "factum est".
Rectè dicit Timeodanaos. Perperàm "factus est" ob "factum est" legi. :oops:
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby Essorant » Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:06 pm

it's a semitism and should be considered a clause of its own

The Hebrew isn't that way though. The noun <b>erebh</b> "evening" is the subject of the reverse-imperfect of the verb "to be" <b>vayehi</b> "and (there) was" and then thilk verbform is used again with <b>boqer</b> "morning" as the subject, literally "And there was evening and there was morning, a second day".<pre></pre>
Textkit Fan
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:35 pm
Location: Regina, SK; Canada

Postby mjs » Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:47 am

I think vespere and mane are used adverbially here and mean in the evening and in the (early) morning respectively.
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Suecia

Postby Merus Ipse » Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:59 am

Thanks all,

There were some accompanying notes which my professor gave to us-unfortunately they were not listed in the same order as they appeared in the text.

Of relevance is that vespere is actually in the nominative, as well as mane (actually indecl.), a particular oddity of post-classical Latin.
Merus Ipse
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 6:07 pm

Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hlawson38 and 142 guests