Post by Bitmap on Feb 25, 2023 20:01:04 GMT
This one is actually an interesting question from LatinC:
In case the screenshot doesn't work anymore at some point in time: the question is why there are passages in Genesis like 1:5 in which it says "factumque est vespere et mane dies unus" (rather than factus est).
Sarah's reply is probably accurate in saying that dies unus is more or less a sentence of its own, but it's still a bit weird that Latin uses the ablative here for vesper and an implied ablative for the indeclinable mane. The Septuaginta seemed to be truer to the original text by straight-up writing καὶ ἐγένετο ἑσπέρα καὶ ἐγένετο πρωί, ἡμέρα μία (unless I'm getting the Greek wrong).
The Hebrew literally says (at least as far as I can tell) "and it became (= came into existence) evening and it became morning. The first day."
The interesting question is why Latin put the ablative there. Did they try to make sense of it by turning it into "and it happened in the evening, and it happened in the morning, and (thus) the first day (came to be)?!
Or is vespere just weirdly in line with mane and not really intended to be ablative (which would be a lot less likely to me, but it would have some resemblance with how late Latin developed ... but still, it feels weird).
Whatever it is, the Latin version is trying to make up for a slightly weird Hebrew structure there.
In case the screenshot doesn't work anymore at some point in time: the question is why there are passages in Genesis like 1:5 in which it says "factumque est vespere et mane dies unus" (rather than factus est).
Sarah's reply is probably accurate in saying that dies unus is more or less a sentence of its own, but it's still a bit weird that Latin uses the ablative here for vesper and an implied ablative for the indeclinable mane. The Septuaginta seemed to be truer to the original text by straight-up writing καὶ ἐγένετο ἑσπέρα καὶ ἐγένετο πρωί, ἡμέρα μία (unless I'm getting the Greek wrong).
The Hebrew literally says (at least as far as I can tell) "and it became (= came into existence) evening and it became morning. The first day."
The interesting question is why Latin put the ablative there. Did they try to make sense of it by turning it into "and it happened in the evening, and it happened in the morning, and (thus) the first day (came to be)?!
Or is vespere just weirdly in line with mane and not really intended to be ablative (which would be a lot less likely to me, but it would have some resemblance with how late Latin developed ... but still, it feels weird).
Whatever it is, the Latin version is trying to make up for a slightly weird Hebrew structure there.
