Timeline for "Esto mihi in rupem praesidii et in domum munitam..."
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 14:21 | history | edited | luchonacho |
edited tags
|
|
| May 2, 2017 at 22:27 | vote | accept | davidrmcharles | ||
| May 2, 2017 at 21:25 | answer | added | brianpck | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 2, 2017 at 20:52 | comment | added | davidrmcharles | I appear to have the Nova Vulgata text, which is slightly different from @brianpck's Vulgate, which is slightly different from the text that appears in the Douay Rheims. However, in all three texts we have the pattern of in followed by accusatives. | |
| May 2, 2017 at 20:52 | comment | added | cnread | 'In the rock of refuge/mighty stronghold' would be in + ablative case. In + accusative is here used to show purpose. I'd translate as 'Serve as a rock of refuge/a might stronghold for me' or 'Serve as my rock of refuge....' | |
| May 2, 2017 at 20:45 | comment | added | brianpck | For reference: the Vulgate has "esto mihi in lapidem fortissimum et in domum munitam ut salves me" and the LXX has "γενοῦ μοι εἰς θεὸν ὑπερασπιστὴν καὶ εἰς οἶκον καταφυγῆς τοῦ σῶσαί με." | |
| May 2, 2017 at 20:39 | comment | added | Joonas Ilmavirta♦ | Good question! Notice the use of accusative instead of ablative: it is "into" rather than "in". I suspect a Hebraism (or Grecism). I reformatted your question a little. If you prefer the original, feel free to roll back. | |
| May 2, 2017 at 20:38 | history | edited | brianpck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2017 at 20:37 | history | edited | Joonas Ilmavirta♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body; edited tags
|
| May 2, 2017 at 20:33 | history | asked | davidrmcharles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |