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).
for exultation is understood in enlargement, to which the opposites are straits, that is, sadness. But both can be either in a good or a bad sense. 'And it shall be, when thy son shall ask thee tomorrow (cras), saying' — it put 'tomorrow' for any future time whatever. 'Seven nations great and many': how then 'many,' if seven? But it said 'many,' meaning having a multitude. 'Thou shalt not make a covenant (testamentum) with them,' since it was speaking of the nations: therefore it put 'testament' for 'pact.' 'And thou shalt not take his daughter for thy son; for she will make thy son depart from me and he will serve other gods, and the Lord will be angry with indignation against you (in uos)': it does not say 'I will be angry,' but as if speaking of another. 'Cities great and walled up to heaven' — a hyperbole.
'Do not say in thy heart, when the Lord thy God shall have consumed these nations before thy face, saying (dicens): for my righteousnesses the Lord has brought me in to inherit this good land': the order is, 'do not say in thy heart, saying.' 'Lest the inhabitants of the land whence thou broughtest us out from there (inde) should say': according to the manner of Scripture 'from there' is added. 'Which made the strength (uirtutem) of the Egyptians': here certain Latin translators, not fully understanding, were unwilling to say 'the strength,' but 'to the strength' or 'to the army,' since what the Greek says, 'dynamis,' some understood as 'army'; but it is an elegant expression. 'Which made their strength' is to be understood as, 'what made it,' since it reduced it to nothing. But because it was said in the plural, therefore it is somewhat obscure.
'Whom the earth opening its mouth swallowed them (eos) up, and their houses and their tents': two expressions are to be noted here: that 'them' (eos) was added, when the 'whom' (quos) it had already said above could have sufficed; and that, having said 'their houses,' it added 'and their tents,' as though in the wilderness they had houses other than tents. But doubtless it wished 'houses' to be understood as the men belonging to them, just as it is said to the people itself, 'and now thou, house of Jacob.' Nor is this expression foreign to the Latin tongue; for the Romans too were called 'the house of Assaracus,' because they derived their origin from Assaracus the Trojan. 'Because your eyes saw all the great works of the Lord which he did among you today.'
Although it was speaking of those works which were done throughout the wilderness during that time when they were led about there for forty years, nevertheless it said 'today,' which it wished to be understood as 'at this time,' however many years the same period might have comprised there. 'The land which the Lord swore to your fathers to give to them and to their seed after them': as though it said, that is, to their seed after them. For he did not give it to them also, but he gave it to them in such a way that he gave it when he gave it to their seed. 'But if by hearing you shall hear all his commandments which I command thee today': 'by hearing' seems superfluous, but it is an expression most familiar to Holy Scripture. 'And he shall give rain to thy land in its season, the early (matutinam) and the late (serotinam).'
Since the morning time is called 'day,' did it perhaps wish the first season of the year to be understood by this? But 'late' (serotinum) is less good Latin. Yet it could not be more properly expressed from the Greek word which they call 'opsimon.' Nevertheless even in the Latin tongue it is commonly used to say 'late' (serotinum), but of what has been done later than it ought. Here, however, it rather wished the season of the year to be understood. 'And when thou hast eaten and art satisfied, take heed to thyself, lest thy heart be enlarged, and you (plural) transgress and serve other gods.' Already above we have noted such expressions, whether that it passes from the singular to the plural, or that it wished 'let thy heart be enlarged' to be understood in a bad sense, where it signified harmful prosperity. 'And the great river, the river Euphrates':
These repetitions are customary in the Scriptures and commend the matter fittingly. 'The Lord your God will lay the fear of you and the trembling of you upon the face of the whole earth': not the fear and trembling with which they themselves fear and tremble, but that with which they are feared and make others tremble. 'Thou wilt not be able (poteris) to eat within thy cities the tithe of thy grain' — in place of 'thou shalt not be permitted' (non debebis). 'And thou shalt burn the city in fire (in igni)': we should more customarily say 'with fire' (igni). 'But if the way shall be far (longe) from thee,' as if it said, 'the way shall be long': it put an adverb for a noun. 'And thou shalt lend to many nations': Scripture calls it a 'lending' when money is given on loan, even if interest be not taken; whence is that too in the Psalm: 'Blessed is the man who is merciful and lends.'
For this our translators preferred to render thus, who thought the sense rather than the words should be followed; for in the Greek it has 'daneiseis,' which is 'thou shalt lend on interest.' 'And thou shalt rule over many nations, but they shall not rule over thee (tui)': as though it said, 'they shall not have dominion over thee,' that is, the nations; for 'tui,' which it says, is the genitive case singular of this pronoun — whose dative is 'tibi' — not the plural nominative, whose genitive is 'tuorum.' 'But if there shall be among thee (in te) a needy man among thy brethren': it is said not to one man, but to the people, therefore 'among thee.' 'But if there shall be among thee a needy man among thy brethren, in one of thy cities in the land which the Lord thy God gives thee, thou shalt not turn away thy heart nor close thy hand from thy needy brother;'
'opening thou shalt open thy hands to him, lending thou shalt lend to him, as much as he asks and as much as he needs.' Here certainly, since it enjoins works of mercy, the cruelty of usury is by no means to be taken up: whence it is clear that what it says, 'lending thou shalt lend to him,' it wished to be understood as that what he asked should be given on loan. But as to what it says, 'opening thou shalt open thy hands,' of such a kind is also what follows, 'lending thou shalt lend' — a customary expression in the Holy Scriptures. When it had given commandment about the boring of a slave's ear, 'and thy handmaid (ancillam),' it says, 'thou shalt do likewise,' putting the accusative for the dative: it does not say, 'to thy handmaid (ancillae) thou shalt do,' which the custom of our speech demanded. 'But if there shall be in it a blemish, lame or blind, or any evil blemish' — it does not say:
'lameness or blindness' — for these are themselves blemishes — but 'lame and blind,' which are not blemishes, but animals that have blemishes. This too is to be noted, that it says 'an evil blemish,' as though there could be a good blemish. 'And there shall not remain overnight (non dormiet) of the flesh, of which you shall have sacrificed in the evening on the first day, until morning' — in place of 'it shall not remain that night'; 'it shall not sleep' is said. 'Thou shalt not offer to the Lord thy God a calf or a sheep in which there is in it (in ipso) a blemish': the customary expression would be, 'in which there is a blemish'; but this one is more usual to the Scriptures. 'And thou shalt stone them with stones (in lapidibus), and they shall die': what by our custom would be said 'with stones' (lapidibus), not 'in stones' (in lapidibus). 'He shall not multiply for himself horse (equum)': it put 'horse' for 'horses' or for 'cavalry';
whence some have rendered it 'cavalry.' 'Thou shalt not be able (poteris) to set over thyself a foreign man, because he is not thy brother': 'thou shalt not be able' is said in place of 'thou shalt not be permitted' (non debebis). 'According to all that thou didst ask of the Lord thy God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying (dicentes)': when it had said above 'thou didst ask,' it appended 'saying' (plural), not 'saying' (singular, dicens). 'For the Lord your God, who goes before you (uobiscum)': it did not say 'you' (uos). 'If thou shalt come upon (occurreris) a bird's nest before thy face in the way': it is to be noted that it said 'thou shalt come upon' even of one not walking. 'But if thou shalt build a new house, thou shalt make a parapet for thy roof-terrace, and thou shalt not commit manslaughter in thy house, if he who has fallen fall from it,' that is, 'let him who has fallen fall from the roof-terrace.' It is a very unusual expression.
'And departing she shall have belonged to another man, and the latest (nouissimus) man shall hate her.' It is to be noted that of two, the later is called 'newest' (nouissimus). Such an expression is in the Gospel too, when it is asked of two brothers which of them did the will of the father, and the answer is 'the newest' (nouissimus), when there were two. 'Thou shalt not take in pledge a millstone nor the upper stone of the mill, because this man takes a soul in pledge' — in place of 'because thou takest a soul in pledge, if thou shalt do it.' Next it is to be noted that it said 'soul' for that life which the soul has in the body: from which expression is that too in the Gospel, 'Is not the soul (life) more than food?' 'But if a man be found stealing a soul from among his brethren the sons of Israel': it put 'soul' for 'man.' Then it follows, 'and overpowering him he sells him':
which is an expression no less to be noted. For it did not wish to say 'her' (eam), which would have been more consequent, since it had said 'soul,' but 'him' (eum), that is, 'the man,' in whose meaning it had said 'soul.' 'If there be a debt in thy neighbour, any debt whatever': the repetition of the word makes the expression to be noted. 'But if the man be unwilling to take the wife of his brother, then the woman shall go up in the gate to the senate and shall say: the brother of my husband is unwilling to raise up the name of his brother in Israel, the brother of my husband has refused.' Although Scripture loves repetitions of words, this repetition is nonetheless rather unusual; but it more elegantly displays the emotion of complaint. 'Cursed is everyone who shall have slept with any beast' — in place of 'shall have lain (concubuerit).'
Then 'with any beast (cum omni pecore)' in place of 'with whatever beast (cum quolibet pecore).' 'And thou shalt serve (seruies) thy enemies, whom the Lord thy God shall send upon thee': the Greek has 'latreuseis,' where the Latin translated 'thou shalt serve.' But Scripture is accustomed to put this word for that servitude which is owed to God: whence they are called idolaters who serve idols with that servitude; therefore here this word is put in an unusual way. Although it can also have this sense, that it said so weightily many things, that they should be compelled to have served their enemies, greatly exulting over them, as though gods. 'A nation of which thou shalt not hear its (eius) voice': this too is to be noted, that it said both 'of which' (cuius) and 'its' (eius), as the Scriptures are wont to speak, and that which it says:
其次「與任何獸（cum omni pecore）」代替「與隨便甚麼獸（cum quolibet pecore）」。「你必事奉（seruies）耶和華你神所打發攻擊你的仇敵」：希臘文作 latreuseis，拉丁文譯作「你必事奉」。但聖經慣用這字表達當歸於神的那種事奉：由此那些以那種事奉去事奉偶像的人被稱為拜偶像者；所以此處這字用得不尋常。雖然它也可有這意思，就是它如此沉重地說了許多，以致他們被迫去事奉自己的仇敵——這些仇敵極其向他們自誇，如同神明。「一國，你必不曉得它（eius）的語言（聲音）」：這點也須注意，它既說「那國的（cuius）」又說「它的（eius）」，正如聖經慣常的說法，並它所說的：
'of which thou shalt not hear the voice' in place of 'whose language thou shalt not understand.' 'The tender and very delicate man among thee shall look with an evil eye (fascinabit oculo suo) upon his brother and the wife who is in his bosom and whoever are left, the sons whatsoever shall have been left to him, so that he shall not give to one of them from the flesh of his sons, of whom he shall eat, because there is not left to him anything in the straitness and tribulation with which thy enemies shall trouble thee in all thy cities.' It is to be noted how it is said here, 'he shall bewitch (fascinabit) him' in place of 'he shall envy him,' as though one left over for this, that it should be necessary for him to give of the flesh of his sons — which necessity compels to be taken as food by parents. For in Proverbs too, where the Latin codices have:
'Thou shalt not dine with an envious man,' the Greek has 'andri baskano'; and 'baskanos' means 'one who casts the evil eye' (fascinus). 'And it shall be, as the Lord rejoiced over you to do good to you (uobis).' The Greek has 'to do good you (uos),' which does not even seem to be a Greek expression. Yet the accusative is understood as put for the dative: whence the Latin translators preferred to say 'to you' (uobis) rather than 'you' (uos). 'You saw all that the Lord your God did in the land of Egypt before you to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, the great temptations which thine eyes saw': it is to be noted that those plagues are also called 'temptations.' 'If thy dispersion be from the top of heaven to the top of heaven, thence the Lord thy God will gather thee.'
It is a marvel if it does not say 'from the top of heaven to the top of heaven' what it is also wont to say, 'from the top of the earth to the top of the earth': perhaps for this reason, that according to the fact that this air too is called 'heaven,' it is joined to the earth. 'It is not in heaven, saying: who shall ascend into heaven and take it for us, and hearing it we shall do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, saying: who shall cross the sea for us and take it for us, and hearing it we shall do it?' It put 'saying' (dicens) in place of what is 'that thou mayest say': a novel expression. 'And the Lord who accompanies thee, with thee.' 'And the Lord said to Moses: behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers': by this word it signified his death. 'You were embittering (amaricantes) the things that are toward God':
that is, 'you were embittering those things which are God's.' 'For I know that after my death, doing iniquity you will do iniquity (iniquitate iniquitatem facietis)': in Greek 'you will do iniquity' is said in one word, which is 'anomesete.' 'And evils shall befall you, the last (nouissimum) of days': for so the Greek has, in place of 'in the last days' or 'in the last of days.' 'Is not this very one thy father who possessed thee and made thee and created thee?' The order is to be noted; for it seems it ought first to have said 'created thee and made thee' and then 'possessed thee.' For how is it understood that one who does not exist can be possessed? 'With the fat of the kidneys (renum) of wheat.' This metaphor is too unusual, that the 'kidneys of wheat' should be understood as, so to speak, the interior of the wheat, whence flour is cast out; for this it also called 'fat.'
For by this name the Greeks are also accustomed to call flour; for the Greek has this in Exodus, where it is written, 'raising flour upon their shoulders.' For the Greek translator put 'ataxta,' which is 'fats.' 'Sons in whom there is no faith in them (in eis)': an expression usual to the Scriptures. 'For the Lord will judge his people and will comfort himself in his servants (in seruis suis)': in place of 'he will comfort his servants'; unless perhaps he says that he himself is comforted, by a transferred word, as it were from indignation and offence, by which the wicked offend him. But his comfort is to be taken thus, not after the manner of men, just as neither his anger and zeal and other such things. 'Where are their gods in whom they trusted in them (in ipsis)': it would be complete even without 'in them.' 'And I will swear my right hand':
that is, 'by my right hand.' 'Rejoice, O heavens, together with him, and let all the angels of God adore him.' Other codices have: 'and let all the sons of God adore him.' But that those who are angels in the heavens are called 'sons of God' is not easily found in the Holy Scriptures. BOOK SIX. EXPRESSIONS FROM JOSHUA THE SON OF NUN. 'But you shall cross over unencumbered, before your brethren, every strong man': that is, 'everyone, whoever among you is strong.' 'That you may know the way by which you shall go it (eam)': it would be complete even if it did not have 'it.' 'And it came to pass, when Joshua was in Jericho': the expression is to be noted; for they were not yet in that same city whose gates had been shut against them: whence it came to pass
that they could not enter into it, unless its walls fell after the ark of the Lord was carried around. Therefore 'in Jericho' was said as, 'in the land which pertained to Jericho.' It was said 'of Jericho' when it was shut: nor did anyone go forth from it or enter in: certainly 'into it' is understood, not 'out of it'; this is called in Greek '[shut] toward it and away from it (?)'. 'The Lord says to Joshua: behold, I deliver to thee Jericho subdued, and its king who is in it, mighty in strength.' It is to be wondered at that here it did not put the connective conjunction, so as to say 'and mighty in strength,' which Scripture is wont so continually to put, that it is found even there where it impedes the sense of the customary expression.
Or are both Jericho and its king called 'mighty in strength'? 'And Joshua saved alive Rahab the harlot and her father's house, and she dwelt in Israel until the present day.' It is to be noted how Scripture says 'until the present day,' which it says continually. For of those twelve stones too, which were set up where the Jordan had flowed away in its lower part and stood still in its upper part while the ark or the people crossed over, it was so said, that they were there 'until the present day': which seems to sound thus, as though these things are narrated a very long time after this writing, and these books were not composed at the time when these things were most recent.
But whoever thinks this, what is he going to say about this harlot, who certainly lived only as long as the lifespan of one person, and yet is said to have dwelt 'until the present day'? Therefore this is said of those things which have not been so established that they should afterwards be changed by those who established them: just as someone is said to be sent into perpetual exile, because he is punished with this penalty not for a predefined time, not because anyone can be perpetual in exile, since the man himself cannot be perpetual. So therefore this harlot too was not commanded to dwell in Israel for a set time; therefore it was said, 'until the present day.' 'The Lord says to Joshua: the people has sinned and has transgressed my covenant (testamentum), which I appointed with them.'
It is to be noted how it calls 'covenant' that which it had commanded, that Jericho should be under the ban and no one should appropriate anything from it for himself. The Lord speaking to Joshua says among other things: 'behold, I have given into thy hands the king of Ai and his land, and thou shalt do to Ai as thou didst to Jericho and its king, and thou shalt take for thyself as spoil the plunder of the cattle.' The expression is especially to be noted, not only because it said 'thou shalt take spoil for thyself,' as though that spoil were to be of one man, when it was to be of all — for such expressions are most usual, when God speaks as though to one, that which he speaks to the people — but this is new here, that Scripture said beforehand, 'and the Lord said to Joshua,' who is agreed to have been one man.
Yet what it said, 'thou shalt take spoil for thyself,' was not so said as though that spoil were commanded to be of this one man, but of the whole people. 'And there was an ambush to the city from the sea (a mari).' Whoever does not know it thinks this city was maritime. But it is the custom of the Scriptures to call the western part 'from the sea' or 'toward the sea,' because from that side the land where these things were done has the sea nearer than from the other sides. 'Stretch out thy hand with the javelin (gaeso) which is in thy hand against the city.' This expression would not be worth noting except for the name, which is obscure to those in whose usage it is not. For what 'gaeson' means is not easily understood. The translator Symmachus is reported to have called this 'a shield';
but the Seventy translators, according to whom we are treating these matters, who put 'gaeson,' I wonder whether in the Greek tongue too they wished a Gaulish spear or lance to be understood: for those are indeed called 'gaesa,' of which Virgil too makes mention, where he says of the Gauls depicted on the shield of Aeneas: 'each brandishes two Alpine gaesa in his hand.' 'And they came into the midst of the camps, these on this side and those on that side.' Two things are to be noted in this expression: one, that when the enemies who were being conquered were in the midst, it was said as though of these that they were on this side and on that, when rather it was the Israelites who were so, who had placed them in the midst to be smitten;
the other, that it says they came into 'the midst of the camps,' Scripture calling even the drawn-up lines set in battle 'camps,' though they are not usually called 'camps,' except where an army halts to remain; unless perhaps they were called 'camps' for this reason, because they went with all their belongings. 'Except the cattle and the spoils which were in the city, the sons of Israel took as plunder, according to the command of the Lord, as the Lord appointed to Joshua.' It was so said, 'except the cattle and the spoils they took as plunder,' as though they did not plunder these themselves, when rather they did plunder these, and therefore they are said to be 'excepted,' because these alone were not consumed in that battle. The Israelites answering the Gibeonites said:
'See, do you not dwell in me, and how shall I make a covenant with thee?' Already above we have noted such expressions. For this is 'see, lest thou dwell in me,' which is 'with me,' that is, in the land which God had promised them. And here they seem to have spoken as though to one man, although the envoy who came to them was not one; but according to their manner, giving answers to a nation and a people, they speak in the singular, just as very often God too, or their leader, speaks to them. It is also to be noted that Scripture calls the pact of peace a 'covenant (testamentum),' according to its custom indeed; for it often speaks thus. 'And it was announced to Joshua, saying (dicentes): five kings have been found hidden in a cave' — in place of 'they announced, saying.'
'Thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies, whom you shall vanquish them (eos)': nothing would be lacking to this sentence even if it did not have 'them.' 'And he took all in war, because it was brought about by the Lord that their heart should be strengthened (confortari cor eorum), so that they should go to meet Israel in battle, that they might be destroyed': it is to be noted that 'that the heart should be strengthened' is not always to be taken in a good sense. 'Thou knowest the word which the Lord spoke to Moses the man of God concerning me and thee': it did not say 'his man.' 'And the sons of Joseph said: the mountain is not enough for us, and the chosen horse (equus electus) and iron of the Canaanite who dwells in Beth-shan.' It said 'chosen horse' for 'chosen horses,' which is not usual in our speech:
whence some Latin translators were unwilling to render 'horse,' but 'cavalry.' But 'chosen horse' was so said for 'horses,' just as in our custom 'soldier' is said for 'soldiers.' 'And their goings-out were the Jordan, and the borders shall turn back (reuertentur) to the sea.' It did not say 'they turned back' or at least 'they turn back,' as it is wont to say of borders, but 'shall turn back,' as though it were still future, when this is a narration of past things. And in nearly all these very divisions of the lands, through each several tribe, Scripture speaks thus, so as to use verbs of future time. 'For him who has smitten a soul unwillingly to flee thither.' Here we ought to understand 'soul' either as a man, or as the life of the flesh, which is by means of the soul:
by which expression that too was said by the brethren of Joseph: 'let us not smite his soul,' that is, 'let us not kill him.' For if the soul could be smitten by the slayer, the Lord would not say: 'Do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.' 'The Lord commanded by the hand of Moses (in manu Moysi)': an expression most familiar to the Scriptures; for it is thus said, 'the word which came by the hand of this or that prophet,' that is, given into his power of speaking. 'And Joshua took stone knives, in which (in quibus) he circumcised the sons of Israel.' It did not say 'with which (quibus) he circumcised,' but 'in which.' 'And when Joshua dismissed them into their houses, and blessed them, saying.' Here the copulative conjunction, that is 'and,' seems superfluous; for it could be said thus:
由這說法，約瑟的弟兄們也說了那句：「我們不可擊打他的命（靈魂）」，就是「我們不可殺他」。因為若靈魂能被殺人者所擊打，主就不會說：「那殺身體不能殺靈魂的，不要怕他們」。「耶和華藉摩西的手（in manu Moysi）吩咐」：這是聖經最熟習的說法；因為它這樣說「臨到這位或那位先知之手的話語」，就是交在他說話的能力之下。「約書亞拿了石刀，在其中（in quibus）他給以色列人行了割禮」。它不說「用那刀（quibus）行割禮」，而說「在其中」。「約書亞打發他們回自己的家去，並為他們祝福，說……」。此處連接詞，即「並（et）」，似乎多餘；因為本可這樣說：
'and when Joshua dismissed them into their houses, he blessed them, saying.' Likewise another expression is to be noted, that when Scripture had said, 'and Joshua blessed them, saying,' and by these words had made them attentive to hear what Joshua said in blessing, it subjoined this only: 'in great riches they went to their houses; and very much cattle and silver and gold and very much clothing they divided as spoil of their enemies with their brethren' — which appears to be more of a narrator than of one blessing. 'And they built there an altar upon the Jordan, a great altar to see (uidere)': this expression is known even in Latin speech. 'And the sons of Israel heard, even of those saying (dicentium)': it does not say 'to those saying' (dicentibus) or 'saying' (dicentes). 'To serve the service of the Lord (seruire seruitutem domini).'
In which expression two things are to be noted: both 'to serve the service,' which is also found as a Latin expression, and 'the service of the Lord,' that is, that which is owed or rendered to the Lord. 'And Phinehas the priest and all the leaders of the synagogue who were with him, hearing (audientes) the words which the sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh had spoken, and they pleased them.' 'Hearing' is put for 'they heard,' or the 'and' here is superfluous; for the sense is complete: 'hearing these words, they pleased them.' Yet not without inconsequence, because 'when they had heard' ought to have been said. 'And Joshua was elder, advanced in days (senior prouectus diebus).' We noted that this was said of Abraham: that in the Scriptures 'elder' (senior) is called not only he who is below the age of an old man, but even one very old.
Whence not every 'elder' is an 'old man,' but every 'old man' can be called 'elder.' 'And he brought the sea over them and covered over them (operuit super illos)': it did not say 'covered them (operuit illos),' although some translators preferred to say this. 'In all the nations which we passed through them (per ipsas)': these expressions are usual in the Scriptures and are not to be noted so often as they frequently occur. BOOK SEVEN. EXPRESSIONS FROM JUDGES. 'And it came to pass, after Joshua died, the sons of Israel inquired in the Lord (in domino)': it did not say 'the Lord (dominum),' which the custom of our speech demanded. 'And let us war in the Canaanite (in Chananaeo)': it did not say 'against the Canaanite' or 'toward the Canaanite' or at least 'into the Canaanite.'
由此並非每一「長者」都是「老人」，但每一「老人」都可稱為「長者」。「他使海臨到他們，並淹沒了他們（operuit super illos，直譯：淹沒在他們之上）」：它不說「淹沒了他們（operuit illos）」，雖然有些譯者寧願這樣說。「在我們所經過的一切國中（per ipsas）」：這些說法在聖經中是常見的，其頻繁出現的程度，並不需要如此頻繁地加以注意。第七卷。士師記中的語法。「約書亞死後，以色列人求問於耶和華（in domino）」：它不說「求問耶和華（dominum）」，這卻是我們言語的習慣所要求的。「讓我們在迦南人裡爭戰（in Chananaeo）」：它不說「攻擊迦南人」或「對抗迦南人」，或至少「進攻迦南人」。
'And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, a son of a hundred and ten years.' This repetition, that when it had said 'son of Nun,' it repeated 'son' and then added 'of a hundred and ten years,' is unusual, in that it says 'a son of a hundred and ten years' rather than 'a man of a hundred and ten years'; but nevertheless it is found elsewhere too. 'And all that generation were laid to (adpositi sunt) their fathers': the expression is to be noted, that it does not say 'was laid to' (adposita est), because they were many. 'He delivered them into the hand of plunderers (in manu praedantium)': it did not say 'into the hand' (in manum), which the Latin expression seems to require. 'And when the Lord raised up judges for them, and the Lord was with the judge': by a customary expression the 'and' here is superfluous; for it would be complete:
「耶和華的僕人嫩的兒子約書亞死了，是一百一十歲的兒子」。這重複——就是既說了「嫩的兒子」，又重複「兒子」然後加上「一百一十歲的」——是不尋常的，因它說「一百一十歲的兒子」而非「一百一十歲的人」；但這在別處也可見到。「那全世代的人都被歸到（adpositi sunt）他們列祖那裡」：這說法須注意，它不說「被歸到（adposita est，單數）」，因為他們人數眾多。「他將他們交在搶奪者手中（in manu praedantium）」：它不說「交在手裡（in manum，賓格）」，這卻是拉丁文說法所似乎要求的。「當耶和華為他們興起士師，並耶和華與士師同在」：按慣常的說法，此處的「並（et）」是多餘的；因為本可完整地作：
And when the Lord raised up judges for them, the Lord was with the judge. This too is to be noted: that in passing from the plural to the singular it does not say 'with the judges,' but 'with the judge,' that is, with each individual judge. 'And it came to pass, when the judge died, that they turned back and again did corruptly beyond their fathers.' The correct expression, according to the usage of our speech, could have been this: 'and it happened, when the judge died, that they turned back and again did corruptly beyond their fathers.' If it did not have the 'and,' it would be complete: 'when the judge died, they turned back and again did corruptly beyond their fathers,' that is, more than their fathers. 'Because this nation has forsaken my covenant to so great a degree (tanta).'