Typically the perf. pass. part + some present tense form of sum = past tense passive verb.
E.g. Scriptum est = It was written.
But I get the sense of the vulgate, and maybe medieval latin is more “conversational” shall we say and that “Scriptum est” in some of these contexts really means “It is written.”
The only example I have immediately at hand is from John 19:19 (but I have a vague sense that I’ve come across this elsewhere): “Scripsit autem et titulum Pilatus, et posuit super crucem. Erat autem scriptum: “Jesus Nazarenus, Rex Judæorum.””
So Scriptum erat one would normally think meant “it had been written” but here seems to just mean it was written.
Same issue with the next verse actually: "20 Hunc ergo titulum multi Judæorum legerunt: quia prope civitatem erat locus, ubi crucifixus est Jesus, et erat scriptum hebraice, græce, et latine. "
The D.R. and another commentary I found said this means “it was written.” Why doesn’t it mean “it had been written?”
Hi, I won’t comment on the reading of the Vulgate passages above, but this (perf. pass. pple used as a predicated adjective with sum, rather than as an element of the passive tense construction) is common in classical age Latin too. See e.g. Woodcock s100:
(To the OP, note that Michael’s post above is another way of making the same point as the first paragraph of s100 in Woodcock linked above.)
The example that probably leaps to everyone’s mind is the first clause of the Gallic Wars: Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, where e.g. the notes of Greenough et al. provide: "est divisa, is divided: the adjective use of the participle, not the perfect passive（§ 495 (291. b); B. 337. 2; G. 250. R. 2; H. 640. 3 (550. N. 2)）; H-B. 320. iii. "
I see. So basically Scriptum est could either be “It was written” or “It is written” and Scriptum erat could either be “It was written” or “It had been written” and one just has to decide based on context. Is that what you are saying?
Thank you for asking this question. I have to admit that there were times I scratched my head on why this construction was translated two different ways. The use of the participle as an adjective cleared that up for me. I just didn’t have the guts to ask about it. Again, thanks.