Luke. Samaritanus.
Brief Comments on the Latin:
[Note: You will find other helpful information by looking at the segmented text, which shows clearly how the sentences and clauses are organized. You can also choose to have the verbs and/or bold speech highlighted, which often makes the Latin easier to understand.]
10:25. Quidam is a Latin pronoun meaning "somebody, a certain person." Here it is in the nominative masculine singular, agreeing with peritus. Legis is genitive singular with peritus ("experienced in the law"). Magister is in the vocative. Quid is the accusative object of faciendo, introducing a question ("by doing what...?).
10:26. Quid and quomodo are both interrogatives, introducing questions. Legis here is a verg.
10:27. Diliges is future tense. Note the parallel constuction: diliges Dominm Deum tuum and [diliges] proximum tuum
10:28. Vives is future tense.
10:29. Note that Iesus is one of the Hebrew names that declines: Iesum is accusative. Quis introduces a question.
10:30. Suscipio here means "answer." Hebrew place names, like proper names, usually do not decline. Hierusalem is in the ablative here, and Hiericho is in the accusative. Qui is nominative masculine plural. Plagis inpositis is ablative absolute, and so is semivivo relicto.
10:31. Compare the construction accidit...ut with the English "it happened (with the result) that..." Eadem via is in the ablative. Viso illo is ablative absolute. This participle-verb construction, viso illo praeterivit, can be translated as verb-verb, "he saw him and passed by" (because Latin lacks a past active participle, this sort of circumlocution is very common).
10:32. Secus is a preposition that takes the accusative, meaning "beside" or "along side of" something. It is not commonly used in classical Latin.
10:33. Iter is the accusative object of faciens. Misericordia is ablative.
10:34. This participle-verb construction, adpropians alligavit, can be translated as verb-verb, "he approached and bound." The same is true for inponens...duxit, "he placed... and brought..." Illum is the object of both inponens and duxit. Egit is the perfect of ago.
10:35. Duos denarios is the object of both protulit et dedit. The use of ego here is emphatic.
10:36.Quis introduces of question. Note that videtur takes a complementary infinitive: fuisse ("seems to have been"). Illi is in the dative, with the adjective proximus. The antecedent of the relative pronoun qui is illi.
10:37. The antecedent of qui is not expressed ("[he] who..."). The use of tu here is emphatic.
[If you have questions that are not answered by the commentary or by checking the segmented / marked-up versions of the text, please send me a note - that would be very helpful in making these pages more useful for everyone.]