4 Comments

Ex 30:1 why is it "facies quoque altare" (ablative)?

Prov 4:8 vs 12 are the "fueris" in both of these just future perfect?

5:22 "Iniquitates suas capiunt impium..." The number is confusing me here. Why is it suas? Challoner translates this "His own iniquities catch the wicked" but the number and case of suas wouldn't match that of iniquities here unless I'm missing something?

6:23 I just loved what appear to be a series of 4 appositions in this verse

Expand full comment

Both altar, altaris and altare, altaris, -ium exist.

Yes, fut. pf. You can tell because they are working in conjunction with those pf participles.

Suas is feminine acc. plural, agreeing with iniquitates.

Expand full comment

Thank you for the clarification, however if suas is agreeing with iniquitates, then who/what is the plural subject of the verb capiunt? Impium seemed in the translation to be a singular nominative accusative object - the wicked caught by the iniquities, which were the plural subject? But suas wouldn't match that case? Sorry

Expand full comment

Oh, I see. Yes, that is puzzling. There are instances of the accusative as subject of a finite verb, the most common being prolepsis. This is not prolepsis, but I think it is what is called an extended accusative. It becomes more common in late Latin. The extended accusative is an accusative outside of its normal syntactical position. It doesn't seem to bring in any particular shade of meaning, and is probably a rhetorical nicety.

Expand full comment