Exodus 22:9

Posted on March 13, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Ex 22:9 ad perpetrandam fraudem, tam in bove, quam in asino, et ove ac vestimento, et quidquid damnum inferre potest: ad deos utriusque causa perveniet: et si illi iudicaverit, duplum restituet proximo suo.

for committing fraud, whether in an ox or in a donkey and in a sheep and a garment, and whatever can cause damage: the case of both shall come before the gods; and if he shall judge it, he shall restore double to his neighbor.

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 ad for PREP+ACC
2 perpetrandam committing PTCP.FUT.PASS.ACC.SG.F
3 fraudem fraud NOUN.ACC.SG.F.3RD DECL
4 tam whether ADV.INDECL
5 in in PREP+ABL
6 bove ox NOUN.ABL.SG.M/F.3RD DECL
7 quam as CONJ
8 in in PREP+ABL
9 asino donkey NOUN.ABL.SG.M.2ND DECL
10 et and CONJ
11 ove sheep NOUN.ABL.SG.F.3RD DECL
12 ac and also CONJ
13 vestimento garment NOUN.ABL.SG.N.2ND DECL
14 et and CONJ
15 quidquid whatever PRON.NOM/ACC.SG.N.INDEF
16 damnum damage NOUN.ACC.SG.N.2ND DECL
17 inferre to cause INF.PRES.ACT
18 potest is able 3SG.PRES.ACT.IND
19 ad to PREP+ACC
20 deos the gods NOUN.ACC.PL.M.2ND DECL
21 utriusque of both PRON.GEN.SG.M/F/N.INDEF
22 causa case NOUN.NOM.SG.F.1ST DECL
23 perveniet shall come 3SG.FUT.ACT.IND.4TH CONJ
24 et and CONJ
25 si if CONJ
26 illi to him PRON.DAT.SG.M.DEM
27 iudicaverit shall judge 3SG.FUTP.ACT.IND.1ST CONJ
28 duplum double ADJ.ACC.SG.N.POS
29 restituet he shall restore 3SG.FUT.ACT.IND.3RD CONJ
30 proximo to his neighbor ADJ.DAT.SG.M.POS
31 suo his PRON.DAT.SG.M.REFL

Syntax

Purpose Phrase: ad perpetrandam fraudem — preposition + gerundive expressing purpose, “for committing fraud.”
Range of Possible Fraud: tam in bove quam in asino et ove ac vestimento — correlative structure (*tam … quam …*) listing types of property.
General Extension: et quidquid damnum inferre potest — indefinite clause covering any other damaging matter.
Main Judicial Clause: ad deos utriusque causa perveniet — subject = causa; prepositional phrase ad deos (“to the gods” = judges); genitive utriusque (“of both”) modifies causa.
Conditional Clause: et si illi iudicaverit — protasis with dative illi as the judge receiving the case.
Penalty Clause: duplum restituet proximo suo — future legal consequence: double restitution to the harmed neighbor.

Morphology

  1. ad — Lemma: ad; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs accusative; Function: introduces a purpose phrase with the gerundive; Translation: “for”; Notes: very common with gerundives to express intended action.
  2. perpetrandam — Lemma: perpetro; Part of Speech: participle (gerundive, future passive); Form: accusative singular feminine; Function: gerundive complement of ad expressing purpose; Translation: “committing”; Notes: gerundive conveys the notion of an act to be carried out.
  3. fraudem — Lemma: fraus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular feminine, 3rd declension; Function: object of the gerundive phrase; Translation: “fraud”; Notes: here specifically of legal/economic deception.
  4. tam — Lemma: tam; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: first member of the *tam … quam* correlative; Translation: “whether / so”; Notes: emphasizes the breadth of examples to follow.
  5. in — Lemma: in; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs ablative in this usage; Function: marks the sphere or respect in which the fraud occurs; Translation: “in”; Notes: used with ablative for location/sphere rather than motion.
  6. bove — Lemma: bos; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular (common gender, here effectively masculine); Function: object of the preposition in; Translation: “an ox”; Notes: representative example of valuable livestock.
  7. quam — Lemma: quam; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: correlative partner to tam; Translation: “as / so also”; Notes: links the second member of the comparison list.
  8. in — Lemma: in; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs ablative; Function: again marks sphere of possible fraud; Translation: “in”; Notes: repeated with another item in the list.
  9. asino — Lemma: asinus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular masculine, 2nd declension; Function: object of in; Translation: “a donkey”; Notes: common working animal whose misappropriation would be significant.
  10. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: joins further items in the list; Translation: “and”; Notes: simple coordinating conjunction.
  11. ove — Lemma: ovis; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular feminine, 3rd declension; Function: another object of the implied preposition in the list; Translation: “a sheep”; Notes: smaller livestock contrasted with ox and donkey.
  12. ac — Lemma: ac; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: adds a closely related final item with slight emphasis; Translation: “and also”; Notes: stylistically a bit stronger than plain et.
  13. vestimento — Lemma: vestimentum; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular neuter, 2nd declension; Function: another item in the list governed by in conceptually; Translation: “a garment”; Notes: extends the law from animals to clothing/property.
  14. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: now joins the generalizing clause; Translation: “and”; Notes: moves from specific examples to a broader category.
  15. quidquid — Lemma: quidquid; Part of Speech: indefinite/relative pronoun; Form: nominative or accusative singular neuter; Function: subject of the following verb phrase; Translation: “whatever”; Notes: deliberately open-ended to cover all other cases.
  16. damnum — Lemma: damnum; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular neuter, 2nd declension; Function: object of the infinitive inferre; Translation: “damage”; Notes: refers to financial or material loss.
  17. inferre — Lemma: infero; Part of Speech: verb; Form: present active infinitive; Function: complementary infinitive with potest; Translation: “to cause / to bring about”; Notes: describes the potential action toward the property.
  18. potest — Lemma: possum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular present active indicative; Function: main verb of the general clause; Translation: “is able”; Notes: expresses capability (“whatever is able to cause damage”).
  19. ad — Lemma: ad; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs accusative; Function: introduces the goal of the legal process; Translation: “to”; Notes: here “to the gods” in the sense of appearing before judges.
  20. deos — Lemma: deus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative plural masculine, 2nd declension; Function: object of ad; Translation: “the gods”; Notes: reflects Hebrew *Elohim*, often understood as “judges.”
  21. utriusque — Lemma: uterque; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: genitive singular masculine/feminine/neuter; Function: possessive modifier of causa; Translation: “of both”; Notes: refers to both parties in the dispute.
  22. causa — Lemma: causa; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular feminine, 1st declension; Function: subject of perveniet; Translation: “the case”; Notes: technical term for a legal case or lawsuit.
  23. perveniet — Lemma: pervenio; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular future active indicative, 4th conjugation; Function: main verb of the clause; Translation: “shall come / shall go”; Notes: future tense of the legal procedure reaching the court.
  24. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: links the judicial clause with the following conditional; Translation: “and”; Notes: continues the sequence of legal steps.
  25. si — Lemma: si; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: introduces a conditional protasis; Translation: “if”; Notes: sets out the condition for the penalty to apply.
  26. illi — Lemma: ille; Part of Speech: demonstrative pronoun; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: indirect object, referring to the judge to whom the case comes; Translation: “to him”; Notes: your chosen singular reading treated grammatically as dative of reference.
  27. iudicaverit — Lemma: iudico; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular future perfect active indicative; Function: verb of the conditional clause; Translation: “shall have judged / shall judge”; Notes: future perfect marks the judgment as completed before the restitution takes place.
  28. duplum — Lemma: duplus; Part of Speech: adjective used substantively; Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: direct object of restituet; Translation: “double”; Notes: legal formula for twofold restitution.
  29. restituet — Lemma: restituo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular future active indicative, 3rd conjugation; Function: main verb of the apodosis; Translation: “he shall restore”; Notes: expresses the mandated future legal obligation.
  30. proximo — Lemma: proximus; Part of Speech: adjective used substantively; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: indirect object of restituet; Translation: “to his neighbor”; Notes: denotes the injured party in the legal case.
  31. suo — Lemma: suus; Part of Speech: reflexive possessive pronoun; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: agrees with proximo and refers back to the subject; Translation: “his”; Notes: reflexive, tying the neighbor back to the subject who must restore.

 

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.