To navigate up to the Genesis index, see index-genesis.
v-ha-adam yada et-havvah ishto, vattahar vatteled et-qayin, vatomer, qaniti ish et yhwh.
And the human had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain . . .
We have previously discussed the puzzling statement by Eve. Today’s question is much less interesting. Notice that ha- in v-ha-adam (“And the human”). If there were no ha, then we’d have v-adam (“And Adam”). But there is a ha-.
However, the Septuagint translates as if the proper name should stand here. No matter, the Septuagint takes some mild liberties here and there. The Vulgate also reads “Adam.” Taking a glance at BibleHub, we can see that KJV, NIV, NLT, ESV, and Holman all read “Adam.”
Who sticks close to the Hebrew and translates ha-adam as a common noun rather than a proper name? RV, ASV, JPS (1917), NJPS, NASB, NET (all read “the man”). Darby’s translation seems to skate right down the middle of the question, “And Man knew Eve his wife.”
I like that these translations that use “man” rather than Adam here. They could go further and read “human,” as the Bible is clear that the term adam is not limited to male people (Genesis 5:2). Getting gender right in translation can be tricky, though.
It is true that adam is a more gender-inclusive term than man is (in contemporary English). However, “the man and his wife” does seem less jarring than “the human and his wife,” which could seem to make “human” a term that applies only to Adam as opposed to Eve.
Tricky stuff. Translation is all about trade-offs. In particular, it’s hard to create a translation that smoothly and accurately reflects the fact that the term adam is used in Genesis both as (1) an inclusive term for both male and female humans, and (2) a way of referring to the very first human, who was male.