ℹ️ This corpus has no morphological tagging. Glosses are matched by word form against a dictionary — a match does not prove it is the same word (an inflected form can coincide with another word’s lemma). Verify against the original and a specialist lexicon where precision matters.
ℹ️ The Chinese and English alongside are this site's own translation, made directly from the original text on this page (not the CUV or the WEB, which follow the Masoretic Text and a different textual tradition).
It said tanta ('so great') for tantum ('so much'), that is, 'so greatly,' a noun in place of an adverb, which is found also in Latin expressions, especially poetic ones. 'And they did not hearken to my voice': this is rather a Greek idiom. 'The Spirit of the Lord came upon him.' Since the Spirit of the Lord was not simply 'made' but was 'made upon him,' it is expressed as though one said: 'it came to pass that he should be upon him.' From this manner of speech it is also read in the Gospel: 'he was made before me,' that is, 'it came to pass that he should be before me,' which could be otherwise stated as 'he was preferred before me.' 'And Ehud took a sword from upon his right thigh.' Thus it could be rendered, what the Greek has; for the expression is less than good Latin. 'Now Eglon was a very fat man.'
This is said kat' antiphrasin, that is, by a contrary expression, as the following words indicate; for when he was struck, it is said that the fat closed over the wound, because the sword was not drawn out from his belly. 'And he smote the foreigners in (into) six hundred men': it does not say 'six hundred men of the foreigners,' nor certainly 'the foreigners in six hundred men.' 'Has not the Lord God of Israel commanded you: and you shall go to Mount Tabor?' It does not say 'that you should go,' which seems to be the natural sequel, but by an unusual expression: 'has he not commanded you: and you shall go,' so that we understand the verb that was set above, and it becomes: 'will you not go?' Or, by the customary idiom, it has an added 'and'; for with this conjunction removed the sense runs on: 'has not the Lord God of Israel commanded you:'
'you shall go to Mount Tabor and take with you ten thousand men?' and so on. 'Since I do not know the day on which the Lord prospers the angel with me': whether it means He prospers the acts of His angel who is with me, or He makes things prosperous for me through the angel? 'All his chariots, nine hundred iron chariots.' Wherever the phrase be divided, it is an elegant repetition: whether 'all his chariots,' and then follows 'nine hundred iron chariots,' or 'all his nine hundred chariots' and then 'iron chariots' is added. 'And the Lord struck with terror Sisera and all his chariots and all his camp at the edge of the sword before Barak.' How did He strike the chariots with terror, unless you understand those who were in the chariots?
'And the Lord struck with terror Sisera and all his chariots and all his camp at the edge of the sword before Barak.' 'He struck with terror at the edge of the sword,' as though he said: 'he slew at the edge of the sword'; therefore 'he struck with terror' means when he was being cut down by the sword. 'And Sisera descended from upon his chariot': thus could be said in Latin what is in Greek apo tou anōthen. 'And she covered him in her rug (skin)': it did not say 'with a rug' or 'from a rug'; for so the Greek has it: en tē derrei. 'And it shall be, if anyone come to you and say: is there a man here? then you shall say: there is not.' With the conjunction removed it has a coherent sense: 'if anyone come to you and say: is there a man here? you shall say: there is not.' 'And the hand of the children of Israel went on prevailing (lit. going)': this is a customary and frequent idiom.
「主在巴拉面前，用刀的鋒刃驚嚇西西拉和他的一切車輛並他的全營。」「用刀的鋒刃驚嚇」，如同他說：「用刀的鋒刃殺戮」；所以「他驚嚇」是指當他被刀砍倒的時候。「西西拉從他的車上下來」：希臘文所有的 apo tou anōthen，可以這樣用拉丁語說。「她用自己的氈子（皮子）蓋住他」：它不說「用氈」或「從氈」；因為希臘文如此有之：en tē derrei。「將要如此：若有人來見你，問說：這裡有人嗎？你就說：沒有。」去掉那連詞，意思就連貫了：「若有人來見你，問說：這裡有人嗎？你就說：沒有。」「以色列人的手越發得勝（原文作『前進』）」：這是慣常且常見的說法。
'And it was hardened against Jabin king of Canaan': this verb 'was hardened' is set in a new manner for what means 'became strong and very powerful.' 'She pierced his head and struck': that is, 'she struck his head and pierced it.' 'So let all your enemies perish, O Lord; but let those who love him be as the rising of the sun in its strength': it did not say 'those who love you,' although he certainly meant it to be understood of the Lord. 'And it came to pass when the man of Israel sowed': it does not signify one man, but the nation itself. 'Midian went up, and Amalek, and the children of the east, and they went up against him': this repetition of the verb does not seem to have its usual elegance or emphasis. 'And I delivered you from the hand of Egypt':
by 'hand' it signifies power, by 'Egypt' it signifies the Egyptians. 'And Gideon said to him: on me, my lord': the word 'consider' is understood, that is, 'consider on me.' And this expression is most familiar to the Scriptures. 'And if the Lord is with us, and why then have all these evils found us?' It has an added conjunction 'and,' as Scripture is wont to speak: which if it be removed, the sentence is complete: 'and if the Lord is with us, why then have all these evils found us?' Although the former conjunction too could be removed with the sense preserved, so that when he had said 'on me, my lord,' there should follow: 'if the Lord is with us, why then have all these evils found us?' For this rather is what the usage of our speech requires.
'And a calf of seven years.' Here it is plain how Scripture uses the word 'calf'; for according to the usage of our speech an ox of seven years is certainly not a calf. According to this manner of speech, then, it is said of Shamgar that he slew six hundred men besides the calves of the oxen, that is, besides the oxen. 'And he blew on the horn': the word 'trumpet' is understood; for the Greek does not have 'trumpet,' but only 'horn.' 'Their camels were without number, but were like the sand which is at the lip of the sea.' It is agreed that in the matter of multitude it is said by hyperbole. This, however, is a translation.
Where it put 'lip of the sea' for 'shore,' this is constant in the Scriptures, but rare in the Latin manuscripts, because most translators rendered it 'shore,' wishing rather to render what 'lip' signified than the 'lip' itself. For if the Seventy translators had wished to say 'shore,' the Greek tongue would not have lacked a word for it. 'And he divided the three hundred men into three companies (principia)'; it put 'companies' for 'parts.' 'And the man of Ephraim said to Gideon': that is, the men of the tribe of Ephraim. 'Why have you done this word (thing) to us, that you did not call us when you went out to fight against Midian?' It put 'word' for 'deed.' 'And they gave seventy of silver': the word 'in weight' or something like it is understood; the translation from the Hebrew has 'seventy in weight.'
'And Abimelech hired among them men': it said 'among them' for 'from them,' that is, from the seventy weights of silver he hired men. 'Vain and reckless men.' It put 'vain' for 'light (frivolous) ones,' to whom the 'weighty (grave)' are opposed: whence it is said, 'among a weighty people I will praise you.' 'And he entered into his father's house in Ophrah and slew his brothers, the sons of Jerubbaal, seventy men, upon one stone.' Since it had already above said that the sons of Jerubbaal, that is Gideon, were seventy, now it says that these seventy were slain. And yet there were two fewer slain; that is, he himself who slew them and Jotham the younger who hid himself, of whom it goes on to say:
'and Jotham the younger son of Jerubbaal remained, because he hid himself.' And by this it put the whole number for what was almost the whole. 'And the men of Shechem despised in the house of Abimelech': it did not say 'they despised the house of Abimelech.' 'And they set an ambush against Shechem, four companies (principia)': that is, four parts. We have already noted this expression above as well. 'And he took the people and divided them into three companies (principia)': it said 'he took' of that people which was with him; and here it put 'three companies' for 'three parts.' 'And the men went, each to his own place': that is, each one. 'And you shall be to us for a head over all the inhabitants of Gilead': it did not say 'you shall be our head'; for so Scripture is wont to speak. Whence comes:
'be to me for a God, a protector, and for a house of refuge,' and many things of this kind. 'And this was his only child, and he had no son or daughter besides her': this is what is meant by 'his only child'; but for the sake of emphasis the statement is repeated. 'And he had no son or daughter besides her': 'he has no' is said for 'he had no'; for indeed past events are being narrated. 'And his wife was barren and did not bear': although it could have sufficed to say 'barren.' 'And Manoah prayed to the Lord and said: on me, Lord, let the man of God whom you sent come now again to us': 'on me' is said so that 'consider' is understood. 'And he smote them, leg upon thigh (hip and thigh).'
This expression is unusual, yet it is an expression, not any particular spot of a wound in the body, as I explained in the Questions; that is, 'he smote them so as to cause astonishment, to cause stupefaction.' 'And the man of Judah said: why have you come up against us?': it put the singular for the plural; for the men of Judah said it, not one man. 'Lest perhaps you fall upon me yourselves': for what means 'lest you slay me.' And this expression too has been explained in the Questions. 'And they brought him down from the rock, and he came as far as Lehi (the Jawbone)': the place was so called afterward from that deed which Samson himself did there, when fighting with the jawbone of an ass he laid low a thousand. This, then, is said by prolepsis, because after all those deeds this history was written.
'As tow when it has smelled fire': a metaphor from the animate to the inanimate; for tow does not have the sense of smell, but it is said as though one said: 'when it has felt fire.' Although even this word I used, 'has felt,' pertains to the same metaphor; but what is said, 'has smelled,' serves to convey the swiftness. 'And he stretched out his hand and took her': even if it did not say 'he stretched out his hand,' we would surely understand that she was taken with his hand stretched out. 'And it was told to the Gazites, saying': it does not say 'they announced, saying,' nor 'it was announced by those saying.' 'If they bind me with seven fresh sinews not yet dried': it does not say 'seven sinews,' but 'with seven sinews.'
'If they bind me with seven fresh sinews not yet dried, then I shall be weak': it would be complete even if it did not have the 'and.' 'And the ambush was sitting for him in the chamber': which some translated 'were besieging'; but the Greek has ekathēto, that is, 'was sitting.' Because 'ambush' (insidiae) is said in the singular number in Greek, and it cannot be said in Latin insidia (singular). But the expression was to be noted, because it is said 'the ambush was sitting,' for those who were lying in ambush; for it was they who were sitting. 'Now therefore tell me with what you shall be bound': it does not say 'wherewith you shall be bound,' nor 'whence you shall be bound.' 'If they bind me with new ropes': it did not say 'with ropes.' Likewise: 'if they bind me with new cords on which no work has been done, then I shall be weak':
it would be complete, even if the 'and' were not prefixed. 'This third time you have deceived me': it put 'third' (tertium) for 'thirdly' (tertio) or 'thrice' (ter), namely a noun in place of an adverb, which also in Latin expressions is wont to be done elegantly. 'Let me go, and I will feel the columns upon which the house is established, upon them.'