Genesis 43:7

Posted on February 12, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Gn 43:7 At illi responderunt: Interrogavit nos homo per ordinem nostram progeniem: si pater viveret: si haberemus fratrem: et nos respondimus ei consequenter iuxta id quod fuerat sciscitatus: numquid scire poteramus quod dicturus esset: Adducite fratrem vestrum vobiscum?

But they answered: “The man asked us in detail about our lineage—whether our father was alive, whether we had a brother—and we answered him accordingly, just as he had questioned us. Could we have known that he would say: ‘Bring your brother with you’?”

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 At but CONJ
2 illi they NOM.PL.M
3 responderunt answered 3PL.PERF.ACT.IND
4 Interrogavit asked 3SG.PERF.ACT.IND
5 nos us ACC.PL
6 homo the man NOM.SG.M
7 per through, in detail PREP+ACC
8 ordinem order, detail ACC.SG.M
9 nostram our ACC.SG.F
10 progeniem lineage ACC.SG.F
11 si whether CONJ
12 pater father NOM.SG.M
13 viveret lived 3SG.IMP.SUBJ.ACT
14 si whether CONJ
15 haberemus we had 1PL.IMP.SUBJ.ACT
16 fratrem a brother ACC.SG.M
17 et and CONJ
18 nos we NOM.PL
19 respondimus answered 1PL.PERF.ACT.IND
20 ei to him DAT.SG.M
21 consequenter accordingly ADV
22 iuxta according to PREP+ACC
23 id that ACC.SG.N
24 quod which ACC.SG.N.REL
25 fuerat had been 3SG.PLUP.ACT.IND
26 sciscitatus questioned NOM.SG.M.PPPP
27 numquid surely not? INTERROG.PART
28 scire to know PRES.ACT.INF
29 poteramus we could 1PL.IMP.ACT.IND
30 quod that CONJ
31 dicturus about to say NOM.SG.M.FUT.ACT.PTCP
32 esset would be 3SG.IMP.SUBJ.ACT
33 Adducite bring 2PL.PRES.ACT.IMP
34 fratrem brother ACC.SG.M
35 vestrum your ACC.SG.M
36 vobiscum with you PREP+ABL (CUM + VOBIS)

Syntax

Main Narrative Frame:
• At illi responderunt — contrastive entry, subject = illi, verb = responderunt.

Indirect Statement with Detailed Object:
• Interrogavit nos homo per ordinem nostram progeniem — “the man asked us our lineage in detail.”
– per ordinem = thorough questioning.
– nostram progeniem = object of inquiry.

Series of Indirect Questions:
• si pater viveret
• si haberemus fratrem — both subjunctive.

Responsive Clause:
• et nos respondimus ei consequenter iuxta id quod fuerat sciscitatus — they answered exactly according to the interrogation.

Rhetorical Question:
• numquid scire poteramus…? — expresses incredulity.
• quod dicturus esset — indirect statement governed by scire.
• Followed by direct quoted command: Adducite fratrem vestrum vobiscum.

Morphology

  1. At — Lemma: at; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: adversative; Function: introduces contrast; Translation: “but”; Notes: Stronger than “sed.”
  2. illi — Lemma: ille; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: nominative plural masculine; Function: subject; Translation: “they”; Notes: Jacob’s sons.
  3. responderunt — Lemma: respondeo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: perfect active indicative 3rd plural; Function: main verb; Translation: “answered”; Notes: perfect for completed action.
  4. Interrogavit — Lemma: interrogo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: perfect active indicative 3rd singular; Function: main verb of embedded statement; Translation: “asked”; Notes: emphatic inquiry.
  5. nos — Lemma: nos; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: accusative plural; Function: object of “interrogavit”; Translation: “us”; Notes: Refers to the brothers.
  6. homo — Lemma: homo; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject; Translation: “the man”; Notes: Refers to Joseph.
  7. per — Lemma: per; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: + accusative; Function: expresses method; Translation: “in detail”; Notes: Per + abstract noun.
  8. ordinem — Lemma: ordo; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: object of “per”; Translation: “order”; Notes: Means “step-by-step questioning.”
  9. nostram — Lemma: noster; Part of Speech: adjective; Form: accusative singular feminine; Function: modifies “progeniem”; Translation: “our”; Notes: Possessive.
  10. progeniem — Lemma: progenies; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular feminine; Function: object of “interrogavit”; Translation: “lineage”; Notes: Family origins.
  11. si — Lemma: si; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: interrogative; Function: introduces indirect question; Translation: “whether”; Notes: Subjunctive required.
  12. pater — Lemma: pater; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject; Translation: “father”; Notes: Refers to Jacob.
  13. viveret — Lemma: vivo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: imperfect active subjunctive 3rd singular; Function: verb of indirect question; Translation: “lived”; Notes: Subjunctive for reported speech.
  14. si — Lemma: si; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: interrogative; Function: introduces clause; Translation: “whether”; Notes: Parallel structure.
  15. haberemus — Lemma: habeo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: imperfect active subjunctive 1st plural; Function: indirect question; Translation: “we had”; Notes: Subjunctive.
  16. fratrem — Lemma: frater; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: object; Translation: “brother”; Notes: Refers to Benjamin.
  17. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: coordinating; Function: connects clauses; Translation: “and”; Notes: Simple conjunction.
  18. nos — Lemma: nos; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: nominative plural; Function: subject of “respondimus”; Translation: “we”; Notes: Emphatic position.
  19. respondimus — Lemma: respondeo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: perfect active indicative 1st plural; Function: main verb; Translation: “answered”; Notes: Completed report.
  20. ei — Lemma: is; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: dative singular; Function: indirect object; Translation: “to him”; Notes: Joseph.
  21. consequenter — Lemma: consequenter; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: modifies “respondimus”; Translation: “accordingly”; Notes: Logical response.
  22. iuxta — Lemma: iuxta; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: + accusative; Function: expresses conformity; Translation: “according to”; Notes: Common in legal Latin.
  23. id — Lemma: is; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: object of “iuxta”; Translation: “that”; Notes: Refers to Joseph’s inquiry.
  24. quod — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: object of “sciscitatus”; Translation: “which”; Notes: Introduces relative clause.
  25. fuerat — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: pluperfect active indicative 3rd singular; Function: auxiliary; Translation: “had been”; Notes: With perfect participle forms passive periphrasis.
  26. sciscitatus — Lemma: sciscitor; Part of Speech: deponent verb participle; Form: nominative singular masculine perfect passive participle in meaning (deponent); Function: part of periphrastic verb phrase; Translation: “questioned”; Notes: Deponent with active sense.
  27. numquid — Lemma: numquid; Part of Speech: interrogative particle; Form: indeclinable; Function: introduces rhetorical question; Translation: “surely (we could not)?”; Notes: Expects negative answer.
  28. scire — Lemma: scio; Part of Speech: verb; Form: present active infinitive; Function: complementary infinitive with “poteramus”; Translation: “to know”; Notes: Main infinitive.
  29. poteramus — Lemma: possum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: imperfect active indicative 1st plural; Function: main verb of rhetorical question; Translation: “we could”; Notes: Imperfect for customary/hypothetical.
  30. quod — Lemma: quod; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: introduces indirect statement; Translation: “that”; Notes: Not relative here.
  31. dicturus — Lemma: dico; Part of Speech: participle; Form: nominative singular masculine future active participle; Function: predicate within indirect statement; Translation: “about to say”; Notes: Implies expectation/prediction.
  32. esset — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: imperfect subjunctive 3rd singular; Function: copula of indirect statement; Translation: “would be”; Notes: Backshift in indirect speech.
  33. Adducite — Lemma: adduco; Part of Speech: verb; Form: present active imperative 2nd plural; Function: direct command; Translation: “bring!”; Notes: Joseph’s quoted order.
  34. fratrem — Lemma: frater; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: direct object of “Adducite”; Translation: “brother”; Notes: Benjamin.
  35. vestrum — Lemma: vester; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: modifies “fratrem”; Translation: “your”; Notes: Plural possessors.
  36. vobiscum — Lemma: cum + vobis; Part of Speech: prepositional compound; Form: with ablative; Function: expresses accompaniment; Translation: “with you”; Notes: Enclitic “-cum.”

 

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 Genesis. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.