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.
Post Reply
Merus Ipse
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 6:07 pm

A vulgar creation

Post by Merus Ipse »

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

User avatar
bedwere
Global Moderator
Posts: 5102
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California
Contact:

Post by bedwere »

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

I think St. Jerome was translating literally from the Hebrew and using Semitic expressions that are not part of Ciceronian Latin.

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Post by adrianus »

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.

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

Post by timeodanaos »

factum est is something you will find throughout the Bible, and if you read it in Greek at some point, you will read it as ?γένετο δὲ - it's a semitism and should be considered a clause of its own, with the main clause translated as a subjective clause (even though not so in Latin, since subjective clauses take subjunctive):

et factum est autem in diebus illis exiit edictum a Caesare Augusto ut describeretur uniuersus orbis (Lucas II,1)

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (King James version)


Today, factum est is often omitted in translations.


The answer to your question is thus that factum has no congruence to any other word in your sentence except est.

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Post by adrianus »

Oops. Timeodaneos is right. I misread "factus est" for "factum est".
Rectè dicit Timeodanaos. Perperàm "factus est" ob "factum est" legi. :oops:

Essorant
Textkit Fan
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:35 pm
Location: Regina, SK; Canada
Contact:

Post by Essorant »

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>

mjs
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Suecia

Post by mjs »

I think vespere and mane are used adverbially here and mean in the evening and in the (early) morning respectively.

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

Post by Merus Ipse »

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.

Post Reply