Numeri 23:8 (Numbers 23:8)

Posted on May 20, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Nm 23:8 Quo modo maledicam, cui non maledixit Deus? Qua ratione detester, quem Dominus non detestatur?

How shall I curse one whom God has not cursed? By what reasoning shall I denounce one whom the LORD does not denounce?

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Quo by what ABL.SG.F.REL.PRON
2 modo manner ABL.SG.M.2ND DECL
3 maledicam shall I curse 1SG.FUT.ACT.IND
4 cui whom DAT.SG.REL.PRON
5 non not ADV
6 maledixit has cursed 3SG.PERF.ACT.IND
7 Deus God NOM.SG.M.2ND DECL
8 Qua by what ABL.SG.F.REL.PRON
9 ratione reasoning ABL.SG.F.3RD DECL
10 detester shall I denounce 1SG.PRES.DEP.SUBJ
11 quem whom ACC.SG.M.REL.PRON
12 Dominus the LORD NOM.SG.M.2ND DECL
13 non not ADV
14 detestatur denounces 3SG.PRES.DEP.IND

Syntax

First Rhetorical Question: Quo modo maledicam forms the main interrogative clause, asking how Balaam could possibly curse someone.

Relative Clause: cui non maledixit Deus modifies the implied object of maledicam, identifying the person as one whom God has not cursed.

Ablative Phrase: Quo modo expresses manner or means, literally “by what manner.”

Second Rhetorical Question: Qua ratione detester parallels the first question, intensifying the argument with synonymous phrasing.

Relative Clause: quem Dominus non detestatur defines the object of denunciation as one whom the LORD does not denounce.

Parallelism: The two rhetorical questions form a poetic synonymous parallelism, with maledicam corresponding to detester, and Deus corresponding to Dominus.

Morphology

  1. Quo — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative/interrogative pronoun; Form: ablative singular masculine; Function: modifies modo in an interrogative ablative phrase; Translation: “by what”; Notes: The ablative expresses manner or means within the rhetorical question.
  2. modo — Lemma: modus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular masculine second declension; Function: ablative of manner; Translation: “manner”; Notes: The phrase quo modo idiomatically means “how” or “in what way.”
  3. maledicam — Lemma: maledico; Part of Speech: verb; Form: first person singular future active indicative; Function: main verb of the first rhetorical question; Translation: “shall I curse”; Notes: The future tense expresses contemplated action rejected by Balaam’s reasoning.
  4. cui — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: indirect object of maledixit; Translation: “whom”; Notes: The dative follows the construction of maledico, which governs the dative case.
  5. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable adverb of negation; Function: negates maledixit; Translation: “not”; Notes: The negation emphasizes divine refusal to curse Israel.
  6. maledixit — Lemma: maledico; Part of Speech: verb; Form: third person singular perfect active indicative; Function: verb of the relative clause; Translation: “has cursed”; Notes: The perfect tense refers to completed divine judgment, which in this case has not occurred.
  7. Deus — Lemma: Deus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine second declension; Function: subject of maledixit; Translation: “God”; Notes: The divine subject establishes the theological basis of Balaam’s argument.
  8. Qua — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative/interrogative pronoun; Form: ablative singular feminine; Function: modifies ratione in an interrogative ablative phrase; Translation: “by what”; Notes: The feminine form agrees with ratione.
  9. ratione — Lemma: ratio; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular feminine third declension; Function: ablative of means or reasoning; Translation: “reasoning”; Notes: The noun suggests rational basis or justification.
  10. detester — Lemma: detestor; Part of Speech: deponent verb; Form: first person singular present deponent subjunctive; Function: main verb of the second rhetorical question; Translation: “shall I denounce”; Notes: The subjunctive conveys deliberation within the rhetorical question.
  11. quem — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: direct object of detestatur; Translation: “whom”; Notes: The pronoun refers to Israel as the object of possible denunciation.
  12. Dominus — Lemma: Dominus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine second declension; Function: subject of detestatur; Translation: “the LORD”; Notes: Here Dominus refers to YHWH and is therefore translated as “LORD.”
  13. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable adverb of negation; Function: negates detestatur; Translation: “not”; Notes: The repeated negation reinforces the impossibility of Balaam’s intended curse.
  14. detestatur — Lemma: detestor; Part of Speech: deponent verb; Form: third person singular present deponent indicative; Function: verb of the relative clause; Translation: “denounces”; Notes: The deponent form has active meaning and expresses rejection or formal condemnation.

 

About Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Born around 346 A.D. in Stridon, St. Jerome was a scholar fluent in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew whose ascetic discipline and deep engagement with Scripture prepared him for a monumental task: translating the Bible into Latin. Commissioned by Pope Damasus I around 382 A.D., Jerome began by revising the flawed Old Latin Gospels, then expanded his work to the entire Bible. For the New Testament, he corrected Latin texts using Greek manuscripts; for the Old Testament, he translated most books directly from Hebrew—a controversial but principled choice. His final Psalter, however, followed the Greek Septuagint tradition for liturgical use. This composite translation, later known as the Vulgate (editio vulgata), became the authoritative biblical text of the Western Church, formally endorsed at the Council of Trent in 1546. The Vulgate’s influence extends beyond theology into textual criticism and Latin education. As one of the earliest translations grounded in original-language scholarship, it offers a vital witness to the state of biblical texts in late antiquity. Jerome’s lexical and syntactic decisions are studied to trace manuscript history and assess variant readings. Its elegant Latin, consistent in grammar and rich in vocabulary, became a model for medieval and Renaissance learning, bridging classical and ecclesiastical Latin. More than a translation, the Vulgate helped define Christian doctrine, preserved the Latin language, and laid essential groundwork for the critical study of Scripture—remaining indispensable to students of Latin, theology, and textual history.
This entry was posted in Numeri. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.