Imperative that looks like Preterite?

Question

I don't understand this imperative-

Así que, arrepentíos y convertíos para que sean borrados vuestros pecados; para que vengan de la presencia del Señor tiempos de consuelo, y él envíe a Jesucristo, que os fue antes anunciado. -- Hechos 3:19 Santa Biblia, Reina-Valera 1995

These words are commands, in English Bibles rendered as "repent" and "turn" or "return" or "be converted".

I get the "os* on the end as the vosotros form of the pronoun for whom is being addressed.

But arrepentí and convertí are the first person preterite forms of those verbs. I've never seen anything about using those forms as an imperative, so what's going on here?

One clue is that this wording dates all the way back to at least 1602 in the Reina-Valera Antigua. And this is a very "theologically significant" passage, one that would be loved such that people would be reticent to change it. So the same wording is used in the RV 1960, RV1995, and the LBLA that was used in the 1602 RV.

So is this, then, a very old imperative form that is not used in current Spanish? Or is something else going on?

Great question. - --Mariana--, Jun 21, 2010

Answer 1

arrepentí and convertí

Querrido novio: this is just a shortened form as the os is added:

arrenpentid y convertid...

But when you add the os the word shortens to arrepentí(d)os

Pérdida de letras en el imperativo

La primera persona del plural del imperativo (que sería la del presente del subjuntivo) pierde su última letra, es decir la s, cuando se junta con : nos, os y se. Ejemplos:

Cantemos + nos> Cantémonos (no *Cantémosnos) Digamos + se + lo> Digámoselo (no *Digámosselo)

En su forma normativa, la segunda persona del plural del imperativo pierde la d ante os, salvo en el verbo ir: Id> Idos.

¡Que bien! Muchas gracias novia mía. - Goyo, Jun 20, 2010

Answer 2

Actually with postive vosotros commands you take the infintive drop the r and add d There the postive command would arrepentid and convertid. When paired with os you drop the d so it is not confused with the participle . The accent is probably there to show the difference in stress like with the other imperative forms with object and reflexive pronouns attached.

The accent is there to maintain the stress where is was before the pronoun is appended as with all commands. In the vostros commands shown it prevents the io from forming a dipthong which would shift the stress to the strong vowel. - - 0074b507, Jun 21, 2010

Same reasoning with the nosotros commands, but no diphthongs involved. It just keeps the accent on the same syllable as before the pronoun was appended. - 0074b507, Jun 21, 2010

Answer 3

I am so glad you asked this Goyo and for Heidi's great answer. I have also come across several puzzling things while reading the Bible. One day I will compile a short list and ask about them here.

One that stands out in my mind is the constant use of "mas" for the word "but" rather than "pero". This is throughout the entire Book of Proverbs and also confuses me.

Anyway, my point being, I have also had Spanish Biblical questions so I appreciate yours.

My Colombian pastor told me that "mas" is ancient and not used much in modern Spanish. - Jack-OBrien, Jun 20, 2010

That one has been an issue for me as well, but I got used to it. - Goyo, Jun 21, 2010

Answer 4

One that stands out in my mind is the constant use of "mas" for the word "but" rather than "pero".

Rather old fashioned, Nicki, true. And remember, no accent.

Answer 5

Is it possible there is a cultural difference in the interpretation of the original documents? Assuming the Spanish was derived from the original Greek (or whatever first writing)?

Just a theory with no basis in either Biblical knowledge or deep knowledge of cultural differences. Like Lutheran worldview as opposed to a Unitarian.

I don't think so. The Greek is aorist imperative. That would have been translated into Spanish, as it is in English, to an imperative tense. There is no room for cultural difference or interpretation. - Goyo, Jun 20, 2010