Genesis 39:8

Posted on February 8, 2006 by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus

Gn 39:8 Qui nequaquam acquiescens operi nefario, dixit ad eam: Ecce dominus meus, omnibus mihi traditis, ignorat quid habeat in domo sua:

But he, by no means consenting to the wicked deed, said to her: “Behold, my master, having entrusted everything to me, knows not what he has in his own house;

# Latin Gloss Grammar Tag
1 Qui who PRON.REL.NOM.SG.M
2 nequaquam by no means ADV.NEG
3 acquiescens consenting PART.PRES.ACT.NOM.SG.M
4 operi to the deed / work NOUN.DAT.SG.N
5 nefario wicked / evil ADJ.DAT.SG.N
6 dixit said V.3SG.PERF.IND.ACT
7 ad to / toward PREP+ACC
8 eam her PRON.PERS.ACC.SG.F
9 Ecce behold INTERJ
10 dominus master / lord NOUN.NOM.SG.M
11 meus my ADJ.POSS.NOM.SG.M
12 omnibus all things ADJ.ABL.PL.N
13 mihi to me PRON.PERS.DAT.SG.1
14 traditis having been entrusted PART.PERF.PASS.ABL.PL.N
15 ignorat does not know V.3SG.PRES.IND.ACT
16 quid what / which PRON.INTERROG.ACC.SG.N
17 habeat he has / possesses V.3SG.PRES.SUBJ.ACT
18 in in PREP+ABL
19 domo house NOUN.ABL.SG.F
20 sua his own ADJ.POSS.ABL.SG.F

Syntax

Relative Clause: Qui nequaquam acquiescens operi nefario — subject Qui refers to Joseph; participial phrase describes his refusal: “who, by no means consenting to the wicked deed.”
Main Clause: dixit ad eam — simple direct speech introduction: “said to her.”
Speech Content: Ecce dominus meus… ignorat quid habeat in domo sua —
• Ecce marks emphatic demonstration (“Behold”).
• The structure mixes indicative ignorat (“he does not know”) with subjunctive habeat in indirect question (“what he has”).
• Ablative phrase in domo sua specifies possession within household.

Morphology

  1. Qui — Lemma: quī, quae, quod; Part of Speech: relative pronoun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of participle acquiescens; Translation: “who”; Notes: Refers to Joseph in context.
  2. nequaquam — Lemma: nequaquam; Part of Speech: adverb; Form: indeclinable; Function: negates degree or manner; Translation: “by no means”; Notes: Emphatic denial of consent.
  3. acquiescens — Lemma: acquiēscō; Part of Speech: participle; Form: present active nominative singular masculine; Function: modifies Qui; Translation: “consenting”; Notes: Describes attitude of resistance; participial construction adds vividness.
  4. operi — Lemma: opus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: dative singular neuter; Function: indirect object of acquiescens; Translation: “to the deed”; Notes: Dative of reference with participle.
  5. nefario — Lemma: nefarius; Part of Speech: adjective; Form: dative singular neuter; Function: modifies operi; Translation: “wicked / evil”; Notes: Moral qualifier underscoring Joseph’s virtue.
  6. dixit — Lemma: dīcō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular perfect indicative active; Function: main verb of speech; Translation: “he said”; Notes: Marks transition from narration to direct discourse.
  7. ad — Lemma: ad; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs accusative; Function: indicates direction or person addressed; Translation: “to”; Notes: Used with verbs of speech.
  8. eam — Lemma: is, ea, id; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: accusative singular feminine; Function: object of ad; Translation: “her”; Notes: Refers to Potiphar’s wife.
  9. Ecce — Lemma: ecce; Part of Speech: interjection; Form: indeclinable; Function: draws attention; Translation: “Behold”; Notes: Introduces emphatic statement of loyalty.
  10. dominus — Lemma: dominus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: subject of ignorat; Translation: “master / lord”; Notes: Refers to Putiphar.
  11. meus — Lemma: meus; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: nominative singular masculine; Function: modifies dominus; Translation: “my”; Notes: Emphasizes loyalty and duty to his master.
  12. omnibus — Lemma: omnis; Part of Speech: adjective; Form: ablative plural neuter; Function: object of traditis; Translation: “all things”; Notes: Refers to total household possessions.
  13. mihi — Lemma: ego; Part of Speech: pronoun; Form: dative singular; Function: indirect object; Translation: “to me”; Notes: Recipient of responsibility.
  14. traditis — Lemma: trādō; Part of Speech: participle; Form: ablative plural neuter perfect passive; Function: ablative absolute; Translation: “having been entrusted”; Notes: Describes circumstances under which the master’s ignorance applies.
  15. ignorat — Lemma: ignōrō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular present indicative active; Function: main verb of indirect statement; Translation: “he does not know”; Notes: Indicates total trust in Joseph.
  16. quid — Lemma: quis, quid; Part of Speech: interrogative pronoun; Form: accusative singular neuter; Function: introduces indirect question; Translation: “what”; Notes: Governs subordinate clause with habeat.
  17. habeat — Lemma: habeō; Part of Speech: verb; Form: 3rd person singular present subjunctive active; Function: dependent verb in indirect question; Translation: “he has / possesses”; Notes: Subjunctive mood required by indirect discourse.
  18. in — Lemma: in; Part of Speech: preposition; Form: governs ablative; Function: denotes location; Translation: “in / within”; Notes: Refers to the sphere of authority.
  19. domo — Lemma: domus; Part of Speech: noun; Form: ablative singular feminine; Function: object of in; Translation: “house”; Notes: Refers to the Egyptian household.
  20. sua — Lemma: suus; Part of Speech: possessive adjective; Form: ablative singular feminine; Function: modifies domo; Translation: “his own”; Notes: Reinforces that all within belongs to the master, not Joseph.

 

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.