0
   

The grammar of Is 9 - 4 in the Nova Vulgata

 
 
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2016 08:37 am
The phrase is: " ...quia omnis caliga incedentis cum tumultu..."

I don't understand why the genitive singular of the participle for " incendo " is used here. It seems to me that it should be " incendens, nominative singular. . " " Tumultu " is used of course because the ablative here denotes purpose and is given imphasis by the addition of " cum " preceding. The translation given in the New American Bible Revised Nabre is " ...because every boot marching for battle..." And this is a reasonable translation. I just don't see how we can get here given the use of " incendentis. "
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 599 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
George
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2016 04:39 pm
@Edward Reinhart,
Perhaps it is substantive
"for every boot of one who marches . . . "
Edward Reinhart
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2016 05:19 pm
@George,
Yes, I like that very much, at least I am comfortable with it. Let's see if we can get some more responses.
The New American Bible, Nabre translates it as " ...because every one marching to battle... " The New American Bible, Nabre translates the whole verse as " 4
For every boot that tramped in battle,
every cloak rolled in blood,
will be burned as fuel for fire.
Thanks
George
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2016 08:32 am
@Edward Reinhart,
How did you get interested in the Nova Vulgata?
Edward Reinhart
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2016 08:31 am
@George,
I was always interested in Latin since the days when the Mass was said in Latin. Then when permission was given to say Mass in the vernacular the Nova Vulgata came out in 79' and I bought a copy. And every now and then I would brush up on my school Latin and would start trying to read the Nova Vulgata. And I have resolved to do a little reading each day, just a few verses.

And the piece I mentioned above is from the first reading for the Christmas night Mass.

I have Bennet's old Latin grammar to help and it mentioned that the Latin participle could be used as a substantive but I couldn't work out the translation correctly. Then you came on and showed how it could be done. I guess my trouble, like many English speakers, is that I don't really know English grammar as well as I should.

Then too using one's spare time studying Latin is much better than watching T.V, listening to the radio, or surfing the net. There are a lot of Latin resources on the net. It all helps keep the brain working.

I was just thinking just last night that there should be a book devoted just to the Latin use of Participles, the Gerund and the Gerundive, one with lots of examples, not just the one liners give in Bennet and other authorities.

How about yourself? Why are you interested in Latin?
0 Replies
 
George
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2016 09:09 am
I was at one time a student for the priesthood (I didn't make it). I had four
years of Latin in high school and several Latin courses in college. Then came
Vatican II, as you know.

I got interested in it again when someone on this forum's predecessor asked
to have something translated into Latin. I thought "Hey, I could do that."
And I did.

I read from the Latin Vulgate during Lent. Each year I read one of the
Gospels.
Edward Reinhart
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2016 01:58 pm
@George,
Your history sounds like mine. I too attended the seminary but left after the fourth year of undergraduate work. Latin was a difficult subject for me. But about ten years later I resolved to go through my old Latin texts again and I actually got to the point that I had memorized all the various endings for the declensions and conjugations. But that was 15 years ago and I have forgotten most of it. So here I am again.

Getting back to Is 9-4. I checked the Clementine Vulgate and it is even worse. It begins with verse 5 and reads, " Quia omnis violentia praedatio cum tumultu. Very unsatisfactory. And the Douay-Rheims translates this as, " for every violent taking of spoils..." This doesn't fit into the context of the following clause. I suppose that is why the Novo Vulgata changed the Latin.

This makes me wonder about how these translations came down to us. The original writers were inspired. But their secretaries and copyists were not inspired. All the Church has ever guaranteed is that if a Bible has the correct Approbations, it contains nothing contrary to faith or morals, not that there are no poorly translated phrases, clauses or sentences. I think it would be interesting to read a good book on how the Bible came to be and especially the Vulgate.
0 Replies
 
Edward Reinhart
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2017 06:30 am
@George,
O.K., I finally found a good translation to Is 9-4 of the N.V. It is found in verse 5 of the Ignatious Bible revised and in the English Standard Bible. The whole verse reads: " For every boot of the tramping warrior in battle tumult
and every garment rolled in blood
will be burned as fuel for the fire.

This translation works perfectly with your translation. So " incedentis " is fully justified, it was just a matter of finding a way to express it in English. Now the question remains; why didn't the New American Bible, Nabre follow suite.

Congratulations!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The grammar of Is 9 - 4 in the Nova Vulgata
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/13/2021 at 02:42:33