Genesis 31:52

Posted on January 31, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Gn 31:52 testis erit: tumulus, inquam, iste et lapis sint in testimonium, si aut ego transiero illum pergens ad te, aut tu præterieris, malum mihi cogitans.

this mound shall be a witness, I say, and the stone shall be as testimony, if either I shall pass beyond it going toward you, or you shall pass it, thinking evil against me.

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 testis witness NOUN NOM.SG.M
2 erit shall be VERB 3SG FUTURE ACTIVE INDICATIVE
3 tumulus mound NOUN NOM.SG.M
4 inquam I say VERB 1SG PRESENT ACTIVE INDICATIVE (PARENTHEICAL)
5 iste this DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUN NOM.SG.M
6 et and CONJUNCTION
7 lapis stone NOUN NOM.SG.M
8 sint may they be VERB 3PL PRESENT ACTIVE SUBJUNCTIVE
9 in in / as PREPOSITION + ABL
10 testimonium testimony NOUN ACC.SG.N (IDIOMATIC ABL)
11 si if CONJUNCTION CONDITIONAL
12 aut either CONJUNCTION COORDINATING
13 ego I PRONOUN NOM.SG.1
14 transiero I shall pass VERB 1SG FUTURE PERFECT ACTIVE INDICATIVE
15 illum that DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUN ACC.SG.M
16 pergens going PRESENT ACTIVE PARTICIPLE NOM.SG.M
17 ad toward PREPOSITION + ACC
18 te you PRONOUN ACC.SG.2
19 aut or CONJUNCTION COORDINATING
20 tu you PRONOUN NOM.SG.2
21 præterieris you shall have passed VERB 2SG FUTURE PERFECT ACTIVE INDICATIVE
22 malum evil / harm ADJECTIVE ACC.SG.N (USED SUBSTANTIVELY)
23 mihi to me PRONOUN DAT.SG.1
24 cogitans thinking PRESENT ACTIVE PARTICIPLE NOM.SG.M

Syntax

Main Clause: testis erit tumulus … et lapis sint in testimonium — two coordinate clauses expressing oath-bound testimony. erit is future indicative (“shall be”), while sint (subjunctive) has jussive force (“may be”), conveying solemn invocation.
Parenthetical Insertion: inquam — typical of direct speech in Latin narrative, adding emphasis from the speaker (Laban).
Conditional Clause: si aut ego transiero illum pergens ad te, aut tu præterieris, malum mihi cogitans — structured as a double alternative introduced by aut … aut (“if either … or”). transiero and præterieris are both *future perfects*, indicating the completed crossing of a boundary.
Participial Phrases: pergens ad te (“going toward you”) and malum mihi cogitans (“thinking harm toward me”) modify the respective subjects, expressing motive or intent.
Syntax Summary: This verse formalizes the covenant boundary, defining mutual restraint between Jacob and Laban. The mound and stone serve as legal witnesses, while the conditional structure prevents future hostility.

Morphology

  1. testis — Lemma: testis; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: predicate nominative; Translation: “witness”; Notes: Legal metaphor for divine and material testimony.
  2. erit — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: third person singular future active indicative; Function: copula; Translation: “shall be”; Notes: Expresses certainty of the covenant’s witness.
  3. tumulus — Lemma: tumulus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of “erit”; Translation: “mound”; Notes: Monument serving as visible covenant boundary.
  4. inquam — Lemma: inquam; Part of Speech: verb (defective); Form: first person singular present active indicative; Function: parenthetical remark by speaker; Translation: “I say”; Notes: Common in direct discourse in Latin narrative.
  5. iste — Lemma: iste; Part of Speech: demonstrative pronoun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: modifier of “tumulus”; Translation: “this”; Notes: Proximal demonstrative emphasizing the object before them.
  6. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable; Function: connects coordinated subjects; Translation: “and”; Notes: Links mound and stone.
  7. lapis — Lemma: lapis; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of “sint”; Translation: “stone”; Notes: Physical representation of covenant permanence.
  8. sint — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: third person plural present active subjunctive; Function: jussive subjunctive; Translation: “may they be”; Notes: Invokes divine or solemn wish.
  9. in — Lemma: in; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs accusative (idiomatic); Function: expresses purpose/result; Translation: “as / for”; Notes: Used idiomatically with “testimonium.”
  10. testimonium — Lemma: testimonium; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: object of “in” (idiomatically); Translation: “testimony”; Notes: Indicates legal witness or evidence.
  11. si — Lemma: si; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable; Function: introduces condition; Translation: “if”; Notes: Conditional protasis.
  12. aut — Lemma: aut; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable; Function: introduces alternative condition; Translation: “either”; Notes: Used in paired structure “aut … aut.”
  13. ego — Lemma: ego; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: nominative singular first person; Function: subject of “transiero”; Translation: “I”; Notes: Refers to Laban.
  14. transiero — Lemma: transeo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: first person singular future perfect active indicative; Function: main verb of first conditional; Translation: “I shall have passed”; Notes: Marks completed future act.
  15. illum — Lemma: ille; Part of Speech: demonstrative pronoun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: object of “transiero”; Translation: “that (mound)”; Notes: Refers to the boundary marker.
  16. pergens — Lemma: pergo; Part of Speech: participle; Form: nominative singular masculine present active; Function: circumstantial participle modifying “ego”; Translation: “going”; Notes: Describes direction of movement toward Jacob.
  17. ad — Lemma: ad; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs accusative; Function: expresses motion toward; Translation: “toward”; Notes: Marks direction of action.
  18. te — Lemma: tu; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: accusative singular second person; Function: object of “ad”; Translation: “you”; Notes: Refers to Jacob.
  19. aut — Lemma: aut; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: invariable; Function: introduces alternative; Translation: “or”; Notes: Sets up second conditional clause.
  20. tu — Lemma: tu; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: nominative singular second person; Function: subject of “præterieris”; Translation: “you”; Notes: Refers to Jacob.
  21. præterieris — Lemma: prætereo; Part of Speech: verb; Form: second person singular future perfect active indicative; Function: main verb of second conditional; Translation: “you shall have passed”; Notes: Symmetrical to “transiero.”
  22. malum — Lemma: malus; Part of Speech: adjective (used substantively); Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: direct object of “cogitans”; Translation: “evil / harm”; Notes: Refers to hostile intent.
  23. mihi — Lemma: ego; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: dative singular first person; Function: indirect object; Translation: “to me”; Notes: Recipient of harm in thought.
  24. cogitans — Lemma: cogito; Part of Speech: participle; Form: nominative singular masculine present active; Function: modifies “tu”; Translation: “thinking”; Notes: Expresses intention or motive of potential wrongdoing.

 

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.