Genesis 36:12

Posted on February 5, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Gn 36:12 Erat autem Thamna, concubina Eliphaz filii Esau: quæ peperit ei Amalech. hi sunt filii Ada uxoris Esau.

Now Thamna was the concubine of Eliphaz, the son of Esau; and she bore to him Amalech. These are the sons of Ada, the wife of Esau.

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Erat was 3SG.IMP.ACT.IND
2 autem however / now ADV
3 Thamna Timna PROP.NOUN.NOM.SG.F
4 concubina concubine NOUN.NOM.SG.F
5 Eliphaz of Eliphaz PROP.NOUN.GEN.SG.M
6 filii of the son NOUN.GEN.SG.M
7 Esau of Esau PROP.NOUN.GEN.SG.M
8 quæ who REL.PRON.NOM.SG.F
9 peperit bore 3SG.PERF.ACT.IND
10 ei to him PRON.DAT.SG.M
11 Amalech Amalek PROP.NOUN.ACC.SG.M
12 hi these PRON.DEM.NOM.PL.M
13 sunt are 3PL.PRES.ACT.IND
14 filii sons NOUN.NOM.PL.M
15 Ada of Adah PROP.NOUN.GEN.SG.F
16 uxoris of the wife NOUN.GEN.SG.F
17 Esau of Esau PROP.NOUN.GEN.SG.M

Syntax

Clause 1: Erat autem Thamna concubina Eliphaz filii Esau — main clause identifying Thamna as the concubine of Eliphaz, son of Esau; Erat is the copula, Thamna the subject, and concubina the predicate nominative.
Clause 2: quæ peperit ei Amalech — relative clause specifying Thamna’s offspring; quæ (who) is the subject, peperit the verb, ei the indirect object (“to him”), and Amalech the direct object (“Amalek”).
Clause 3: hi sunt filii Ada uxoris Esau — resumptive genealogical statement summarizing Ada’s lineage; hi (these) is the subject, sunt the copula, filii the predicate nominative, with genitive Ada uxoris Esau specifying maternal origin.

Morphology

  1. Erat — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: imperfect active indicative 3rd singular; Function: copula linking Thamna and concubina; Translation: “was”; Notes: Descriptive imperfect giving background information.
  2. autem — Lemma: autem; Part of Speech: adverb/postpositive conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: introduces narrative transition; Translation: “now / however”; Notes: Marks a genealogical aside before resuming lineage summary.
  3. Thamna — Lemma: Thamna; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: nominative singular feminine; Function: subject of erat; Translation: “Thamna”; Notes: Esau’s concubine mentioned as mother of Amalec.
  4. concubina — Lemma: concubina; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular feminine; Function: predicate nominative complement to erat; Translation: “concubine”; Notes: Defines social status of Thamna within the patriarchal structure.
  5. Eliphaz — Lemma: Eliphaz; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: genitive of possession modifying concubina; Translation: “of Eliphaz”; Notes: Indicates to whom Thamna belonged.
  6. filii — Lemma: fīlius; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: genitive in apposition to Eliphaz; Translation: “of the son”; Notes: Clarifies lineage as “Eliphaz, son of Esau.”
  7. Esau — Lemma: Esau; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: dependent genitive with filii; Translation: “of Esau”; Notes: Connects Thamna indirectly to Esau’s line.
  8. quæ — Lemma: quī, quae, quod; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: nominative singular feminine; Function: subject of peperit; Translation: “who”; Notes: Refers to Thamna.
  9. peperit — Lemma: pariō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: perfect active indicative 3rd singular; Function: main verb of the relative clause; Translation: “bore”; Notes: Common genealogical verb introducing descendants.
  10. ei — Lemma: is, ea, id; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: dative singular masculine; Function: indirect object of peperit; Translation: “to him”; Notes: Refers to Eliphaz as recipient of offspring.
  11. Amalech — Lemma: Amalech; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: direct object of peperit; Translation: “Amalek”; Notes: Eponymous ancestor of the Amalekites, later adversaries of Yisraʾel.
  12. hi — Lemma: hic, haec, hoc; Part of Speech: demonstrative pronoun; Form: nominative plural masculine; Function: subject of sunt; Translation: “these”; Notes: Resumes summary of Ada’s descendants.
  13. sunt — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: present active indicative 3rd plural; Function: copula linking hi and filii; Translation: “are”; Notes: Declarative form introducing identification clause.
  14. filii — Lemma: fīlius; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative plural masculine; Function: predicate nominative; Translation: “sons”; Notes: General summary term for Ada’s offspring.
  15. Ada — Lemma: Ada; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: genitive singular feminine; Function: genitive of possession modifying filii; Translation: “of Ada”; Notes: Specifies the maternal lineage.
  16. uxoris — Lemma: uxor; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular feminine; Function: genitive in apposition with Ada; Translation: “of the wife”; Notes: Clarifies Ada’s relation to Esau.
  17. Esau — Lemma: Esau; Part of Speech: proper noun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: dependent genitive with uxoris; Translation: “of Esau”; Notes: Concludes the clause by linking Ada’s sons to Esau’s household.

 

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.