In the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate, Genesis 22:4 reads:
die autem tertio, elevatis oculis, vidit locum procul
The Douay-Rheims translates:
And on the third day, lifting up his eyes, he saw the place afar off.
I am confused about the person in the Latin original. The English translation reads fine.
According to Wiktionary:
This is, elevatis is the second person plural in present tense. So the expression "elevatis oculis" seems to be something like "lift[ing] up your eyes". But that doesn't make sense in the phrase and context, which is a narration from a third-person point of view of what Abraham is doing: He got up during the night, took a donkey, some servants, some wood, and his son, Isaac, and departed to the place God had told him to go. And then the paragraph above comes. It would be natural to expect a continuation of the third person. Instead, it switches to the second person plural, which in my opinion makes no sense. Notice how the third component of the phrase reverts to the third person ("vidit"). So that second person in the middle is very strange! I would have expected something like "elevavit oculis [suis]" (keeping the past tense of the next line), or "elevat oculis [suis]" (keeping the more natural present continuous tense of the English translation [I read there is no explicit differentiation between present simple and continuous in Latin] ).
Interestingly enough, there is a similar issue in Luke 6:20:
Et ipse elevatis oculis in discipulis suis, dicebat: Beati pauperes, quia vestrum est regnum Dei.
And he, lifting up his eyes on his disciples, said: Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Again, the Latin plural second person present active has been translated as a singular third person present (continuous) active. I am puzzled. Is Wiktionary wrong?
Notice that looking for the "tis" declension in the First Conjugation in Wiktionary gives 15 hits, all of them in the second person plural. So I am not sure I am missing a special case here. Unfortunately, Google does not help with the translation either, as it seems to have a particular Bible translation embedded! (else, where does the Abraham come from below? odd!)