Exodus 3:2

Posted on February 22, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

2 Apparuitque ei Dominus in flamma ignis de medio rubi: et videbat quod rubus arderet, et non combureretur.

And the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush; and he saw that the bush was burning, and was not being consumed.

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Apparuitque and appeared 3SG.PERF.ACT.IND + -QUE
2 ei to him DAT.SG.M PRON
3 Dominus LORD NOM.SG.M
4 in in PREP+ABL
5 flamma flame ABL.SG.F
6 ignis of fire GEN.SG.M
7 de from PREP+ABL
8 medio midst ABL.SG.N
9 rubi of a bush GEN.SG.M
10 et and CONJ
11 videbat he saw 3SG.IMP.ACT.IND
12 quod that CONJ
13 rubus the bush NOM.SG.M
14 arderet was burning 3SG.IMP.ACT.SUBJ
15 et and CONJ
16 non not ADV
17 combureretur was being consumed 3SG.IMP.PASS.SUBJ

Syntax

Theophany Clause:
Apparuitque ei Dominus in flamma ignis de medio rubi — “And the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush.”
• Dominus = subject (YHWH).
• Apparuitque = perfect, marking a decisive appearance, with enclitic -que linking to previous narrative.
• ei = indirect object, “to him” (Moses).
• in flamma ignis = prepositional phrase, “in a flame of fire” (ablative of place / circumstance).
• de medio rubi = “from the midst of a bush,” source / origin of the manifestation.

Perception and Object Clause:
et videbat quod rubus arderet — “and he saw that the bush was burning”
• videbat = imperfect, continuous perception.
• quod = conjunction introducing an object clause (what he saw).
• rubus = subject of arderet.
• arderet = imperfect subjunctive, reported content of vision.

Negative Coordinated Clause:
et non combureretur — “and (that it) was not being consumed.”
• Subject is supplied from context (rubus).
• non combureretur = imperfect passive subjunctive, action that is expected but does not occur (paradox of the sign).

Morphology

  1. Apparuitque — Lemma: appareo + -que; Part of Speech: verb with enclitic conjunction; Form: 3rd person singular perfect active indicative; Function: main verb of the theophany; Translation: “and (he) appeared”; Notes: Perfect aspect marks a completed, decisive divine manifestation, with -que linking to the preceding history.
  2. ei — Lemma: is; Part of Speech: personal/demonstrative pronoun; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: indirect object of apparuitque; Translation: “to him”; Notes: Refers to Moses as the recipient of the revelation.
  3. Dominus — Lemma: Dominus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of apparuitque; Translation: “LORD”; Notes: Refers to YHWH, therefore rendered “LORD” according to your convention.
  4. in — Lemma: in; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs ablative here; Function: introduces locative/circumstantial phrase; Translation: “in”; Notes: Takes ablative with the sense of “in, within.”
  5. flamma — Lemma: flamma; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular feminine; Function: object of in; Translation: “flame”; Notes: Together with ignis defines the visible mode of appearance.
  6. ignis — Lemma: ignis; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: genitive of quality / material with flamma; Translation: “of fire”; Notes: Specifies the kind of flame.
  7. de — Lemma: de; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs ablative; Function: expresses origin/source; Translation: “from”; Notes: Used for emergence or origin from a place.
  8. medio — Lemma: medium; Part of Speech: noun (or substantive of adjective); Form: ablative singular neuter; Function: object of de; Translation: “midst”; Notes: “From the midst” emphasizes that the flame issues from within the bush.
  9. rubi — Lemma: rubus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: modifies medio; Translation: “of a bush”; Notes: Identifies the ordinary shrub as the extraordinary locus of the theophany.
  10. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: coordinates a new but related action; Translation: “and”; Notes: Links divine appearance with Moses’ perception.
  11. videbat — Lemma: video; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular imperfect active indicative; Function: main verb of the perception clause; Translation: “he was seeing / he saw”; Notes: Imperfect suggests ongoing, sustained observation of the phenomenon.
  12. quod — Lemma: quod; Part of Speech: subordinating conjunction (from relative); Form: indeclinable in this use; Function: introduces object clause of videbat; Translation: “that”; Notes: Here not an agreeing relative pronoun, but a conjunction of reported content.
  13. rubus — Lemma: rubus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of arderet; Translation: “the bush”; Notes: Ordinary subject in contrast with extraordinary behavior.
  14. arderet — Lemma: ardeo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular imperfect active subjunctive; Function: verb in object clause after videbat quod; Translation: “was burning”; Notes: Subjunctive dependent on videbat in a content clause; imperfect portrays continuous burning.
  15. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: coordinates a second clause within the same object of perception; Translation: “and”; Notes: Links the paradoxical non-consumption to the burning.
  16. non — Lemma: non; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: negates combureretur; Translation: “not”; Notes: Carries the force of the miracle: burning without consuming.
  17. combureretur — Lemma: comburo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular imperfect passive subjunctive; Function: second verb in the same object clause (implied subject = rubus); Translation: “was being consumed”; Notes: Passive voice highlights the expected but absent result of burning; imperfect subjunctive matches arderet as part of the same seen reality.

 

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.