Exodus 20:17

Posted on March 11, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Ex 20:17 Non concupisces domum proximi tui: nec desiderabis uxorem eius, non servum, non ancillam, non bovem, non asinum, nec omnia quæ illius sunt.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; nor shall you desire his wife, nor his servant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor all the things that are his.”

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Non not ADV INDECL
2 concupisces you shall covet 2SG.FUT.ACT.IND
3 domum house ACC.SG.F 4TH DECL
4 proximi of (the) neighbor GEN.SG.M 2ND DECL
5 tui your GEN.SG.M POSS
6 nec nor CONJ INDECL
7 desiderabis you shall desire 2SG.FUT.ACT.IND
8 uxorem wife ACC.SG.F 3RD DECL
9 eius his GEN.SG.M PRON POSS
10 non not ADV INDECL
11 servum servant ACC.SG.M 2ND DECL
12 non not ADV INDECL
13 ancillam maidservant ACC.SG.F 1ST DECL
14 non not ADV INDECL
15 bovem ox ACC.SG.M 3RD DECL
16 non not ADV INDECL
17 asinum donkey ACC.SG.M 2ND DECL
18 nec nor CONJ INDECL
19 omnia all things ACC.PL.N ADJ POS
20 quæ which NOM.PL.N PRON REL
21 illius of him GEN.SG.M PRON DEM
22 sunt are 3PL.PRES.ACT.IND

Syntax

First prohibition: Non concupisces domum proximi tui — negative future indicative functioning as a legal command; domum is direct object, with possessive genitive proximi tui.

Second coordinated prohibition: nec desiderabis uxorem eius — nec links a second future-Indicative prohibition; uxorem eius is the new direct object (“his wife”).

Series of further prohibited objects: non servum, non ancillam, non bovem, non asinum — each accusative noun is understood as an object of the same coveting/desiring, with repeated non reinforcing the total ban.

Final summarizing object with relative clause: nec omnia quæ illius sunt — omnia (“all things”) is object; quæ illius sunt is a relative clause specifying that all things belonging to him are included.

Morphology

  1. Non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: invariable negative adverb; Function: negates the finite verb concupisces; Translation: “not”; Notes: Standard Latin negator introducing a legal prohibition.
  2. concupisces — Lemma: concupisco; Part of Speech: verb; Form: future indicative active, second person singular; Function: main verb of the first prohibition; Translation: “you shall covet / you shall desire”; Notes: Future indicative in the Decalogue has imperative force in legal style.
  3. domum — Lemma: domus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular feminine, irregular 4th declension; Function: direct object of concupisces; Translation: “house”; Notes: The specific possession forbidden as an object of coveting.
  4. proximi — Lemma: proximus; Part of Speech: adjective (used substantively); Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: possessive genitive depending on domum; Translation: “of (your) neighbor”; Notes: Ethically “the one who is near,” here the legal counterpart in community.
  5. tui — Lemma: tuus; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: modifies proximi; Translation: “your”; Notes: Indicates that the neighbor is not abstract but your own fellow covenant member.
  6. nec — Lemma: nec; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable coordinating conjunction; Function: links the second prohibition to the first; Translation: “nor”; Notes: Equivalent to “and not,” continuing the legal list.
  7. desiderabis — Lemma: desidero; Part of Speech: verb; Form: future indicative active, second person singular; Function: main verb of the second prohibition; Translation: “you shall desire”; Notes: Semantically parallel to concupisces, highlighting inner wanting.
  8. uxorem — Lemma: uxor; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular feminine, 3rd declension; Function: direct object of desiderabis; Translation: “wife”; Notes: Refers to the neighbor’s wife as an illegitimate object of desire.
  9. eius — Lemma: is; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: possessive genitive modifying uxorem; Translation: “his”; Notes: Points back to the neighbor implied by proximi, marking ownership.
  10. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: invariable negative adverb; Function: repeats the negation for emphasis before the next object; Translation: “not”; Notes: The verb (“you shall desire/covet”) is understood, so non still negates that implied action.
  11. servum — Lemma: servus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine, 2nd declension; Function: understood direct object of the implied verb (“desire/covet”); Translation: “servant”; Notes: Includes the male household servant among the neighbor’s protected property.
  12. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: invariable; Function: negates the next implied object-verb relation; Translation: “not”; Notes: Keeps the prohibition rhythm as the list continues.
  13. ancillam — Lemma: ancilla; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular feminine, 1st declension; Function: understood direct object of the implied verb; Translation: “maidservant”; Notes: Female servant, paired with servum to cover all household servants.
  14. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: invariable; Function: again negates the implied coveting; Translation: “not”; Notes: Maintains the categorical pattern of “not … not … not …”.
  15. bovem — Lemma: bos; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine (common gender), 3rd declension; Function: understood direct object of the implied verb; Translation: “ox”; Notes: Represents valuable working and economic livestock.
  16. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: invariable; Function: negates the next object; Translation: “not”; Notes: Continues the repeated negative refrain.
  17. asinum — Lemma: asinus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine, 2nd declension; Function: understood direct object of the implied verb; Translation: “donkey”; Notes: Another typical beast of burden in agrarian society.
  18. nec — Lemma: nec; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable; Function: introduces the final, all-embracing category; Translation: “nor”; Notes: Signals that the list culminates in a comprehensive prohibition.
  19. omnia — Lemma: omnis; Part of Speech: adjective used substantively; Form: accusative plural neuter, positive degree; Function: direct object of the implied verb (“you shall not covet all things …”); Translation: “all things”; Notes: Collects every remaining possession into one sweeping category.
  20. quæ — Lemma: qui; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: nominative plural neuter; Function: subject of the relative clause modifying omnia; Translation: “which”; Notes: Agrees with neuter plural omnia and introduces the clause defining ownership.
  21. illius — Lemma: ille; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: possessive genitive inside the relative clause; Translation: “of him”; Notes: Again points back to the neighbor as the rightful owner.
  22. sunt — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: present indicative active, third person plural; Function: copular verb of the relative clause; Translation: “are”; Notes: Asserts present belonging: all such things are his, and thus must not be coveted.

 

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 Exodus. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.