Being is not a genus, since it is not predicated univocally, but analogically
Genus is a term that is used in Aristotles Organon; as is predicate and I think univocal and analogy.
If ordinary language is a guide, then one would expect two terms in analogy: ie A is analogous to B; but this is not the case above - why? One might to expect one or the other term is left implicit, perhaps.
Univocal translated literally means 'one voice'.
Predicate, is that part of a sentence that 'acts' or completes an idea or proposition for some subject.
Genus, if zoology is any guide, is a grouping of individuals that have some essential character in common.
So, the above sentence seems to say that Being is not something that all beings have in common; since there is not a single predicate that can be said for all subjects in an essential way; but we have many predicates (possibly infinite) each of whose subjects form a genus; and thus we have many (possibly infinite) genuses of being.
And to reduce all these genuses of being to a single genus is not possible via some predicate (since none of these genuses have an essence in common); so to 'produce' or 'find' Being one must use analogy.
Is this the correct sense of the sentence above in Thomism?