Genesis 37:8

Posted on February 6, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Gn 37:8 Responderunt fratres eius: Numquid rex noster eris? aut subiiciemur ditioni tuæ? Hæc ergo causa somniorum atque sermonum, invidiæ et odii fomitem ministravit.

And his brothers answered: “Shall you indeed be our king? Or shall we be subject to your rule?” This therefore became, because of the dreams and the words, a source of envy and hatred.

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Responderunt they answered V.3PL.PERF.ACT.IND
2 fratres brothers NOUN.NOM.PL.M
3 eius his PRON.POSS.GEN.SG.M
4 Numquid surely? ADV.INTERROG
5 rex king NOUN.NOM.SG.M
6 noster our PRON.POSS.NOM.SG.M
7 eris will you be V.2SG.FUT.ACT.IND
8 aut or CONJ
9 subiiciemur shall we be subject V.1PL.FUT.PASS.IND
10 ditioni authority NOUN.DAT.SG.F
11 tuæ your PRON.POSS.DAT.SG.F
12 Hæc this PRON.DEM.NOM.SG.F
13 ergo therefore ADV
14 causa cause NOUN.NOM.SG.F
15 somniorum of dreams NOUN.GEN.PL.N
16 atque and CONJ
17 sermonum of words NOUN.GEN.PL.M
18 invidiæ of envy NOUN.GEN.SG.F
19 et and CONJ
20 odii of hatred NOUN.GEN.SG.N
21 fomitem fuel / source NOUN.ACC.SG.M
22 ministravit supplied / provided V.3SG.PERF.ACT.IND

Syntax

Main Clause 1: Responderunt fratres eius —
The subject fratres eius (“his brothers”) and the verb responderunt (“they answered”) form the main clause introducing Joseph’s brothers’ reaction.

Direct Questions:
1. Numquid rex noster eris? — An interrogative using numquid to expect a negative answer (“Will you really be our king?”). The predicate rex noster and verb eris express anticipated kingship.
2. aut subiiciemur ditioni tuæ? — A coordinated question introduced by aut (“or”), with subiiciemur as the main verb (“shall we be subject to your rule?”) and ditioni tuæ as the dative of possession or control.

Main Clause 2: Hæc ergo causa somniorum atque sermonum invidiæ et odii fomitem ministravit —
Subject Hæc causa governs the perfect verb ministravit (“provided”), taking fomitem as its object. The genitive phrases invidiæ et odii express what kind of fuel it was—“the fuel of envy and hatred.”

Morphology

  1. Responderunt — Lemma: respondeō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person plural perfect indicative active; Function: main verb; Translation: “they answered”; Notes: Marks a completed response to Joseph’s revelation.
  2. fratres — Lemma: frāter; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative plural masculine; Function: subject of responderunt; Translation: “brothers”; Notes: Refers to Joseph’s siblings, emphasizing their collective opposition.
  3. eius — Lemma: is, ea, id; Part of Speech: possessive pronoun; Form: genitive singular masculine; Function: modifies fratres; Translation: “his”; Notes: Denotes Joseph as the referent of possession.
  4. Numquid — Lemma: numquid; Part of Speech: interrogative adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: introduces a question expecting a negative answer; Translation: “surely (not)?”; Notes: Adds irony to the brothers’ tone.
  5. rex — Lemma: rēx; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: predicate nominative; Translation: “king”; Notes: The role Joseph’s dream symbolically implies.
  6. noster — Lemma: noster, -a, -um; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: modifies rex; Translation: “our”; Notes: Expresses incredulity at Joseph’s supposed dominion.
  7. eris — Lemma: sum; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 2nd person singular future indicative active; Function: main verb in question; Translation: “will you be”; Notes: Expresses disbelief at Joseph’s claim.
  8. aut — Lemma: aut; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: coordinates questions; Translation: “or”; Notes: Marks alternative indignation.
  9. subiiciemur — Lemma: subiiciō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 1st person plural future indicative passive; Function: main verb of question; Translation: “shall we be subject”; Notes: Expresses anticipated subjection under Joseph’s authority.
  10. ditioni — Lemma: ditiō; Part of Speech: noun; Form: dative singular feminine; Function: indirect object; Translation: “to rule / dominion”; Notes: Dative after subiiciemur indicating what they would be subject to.
  11. tuæ — Lemma: tuus, -a, -um; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: dative singular feminine; Function: modifies ditioni; Translation: “your”; Notes: Refers to Joseph’s supposed authority.
  12. Hæc — Lemma: hic, haec, hoc; Part of Speech: demonstrative pronoun; Form: nominative singular feminine; Function: subject of ministravit; Translation: “this”; Notes: Refers to the situation resulting from the dreams and words.
  13. ergo — Lemma: ergo; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: marks logical consequence; Translation: “therefore”; Notes: Signals conclusion drawn by the narrator.
  14. causa — Lemma: causa; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular feminine; Function: subject of ministravit; Translation: “cause”; Notes: Serves as the agent producing further conflict.
  15. somniorum — Lemma: somnium; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive plural neuter; Function: genitive of cause or origin; Translation: “of dreams”; Notes: Specifies the origin of strife—Joseph’s dreams.
  16. atque — Lemma: atque; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: joins coordinated genitives; Translation: “and”; Notes: Strengthens the link between somniorum and sermonum.
  17. sermonum — Lemma: sermō; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive plural masculine; Function: complements somniorum; Translation: “of words / speeches”; Notes: Refers to Joseph’s recounting of the dreams.
  18. invidiæ — Lemma: invidia; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular feminine; Function: genitive of quality; Translation: “of envy”; Notes: Expresses the nature of the emotional fuel.
  19. et — Lemma: et; Part of Speech: conjunction; Form: indeclinable; Function: connects genitives; Translation: “and”; Notes: Simple conjunction.
  20. odii — Lemma: odium; Part of Speech: noun; Form: genitive singular neuter; Function: linked with invidiæ; Translation: “of hatred”; Notes: Completes paired genitive construction.
  21. fomitem — Lemma: fōmes; Part of Speech: noun; Form: accusative singular masculine; Function: direct object of ministravit; Translation: “fuel / source”; Notes: Metaphorical—something that kindles strife.
  22. ministravit — Lemma: ministrō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular perfect indicative active; Function: main verb; Translation: “supplied / provided”; Notes: Concludes causal chain by describing how envy and hatred arose.

 

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.